Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 732 F.2d 1357 - Strunk v. Heckler

Strunk v. Heckler’s Empirical Analysis

732 F.2d 1357 · 1984

Citation profile

66
cited by 66 later decisions
January 2015
most recently cited

18 federal appellate · 1 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 66 later decisions — most recently January 2015 · most notably Stephens v. Heckler (1985), Powers v. Apfel (2000)

18 federal appellate · 1 district ·

3601984199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1382 (§ 1611 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 405 (§ 205 of the Social Security Act of 1935)

Relies on Richardson v. Perales · Consolidated Edison Co of New York v. National Labor Relations Board · Whitney v. Schweiker · Cummins v. Schweiker

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 66 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[I]t is the Secretary, not the courts, who must resolve conflicts in the medical evidence.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The plaintiff has failed to supply this court, nor have we found any case law requiring the Secretary to make a finding of mental retardation based solely upon the results of a standardized intelligence test in its determination of mental retardation”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[w]here diagnoses are not supported by medically acceptable clinical and laboratory diagnostic techniques, this court need not accord such diagnoses great weight.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.