Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 739 F.2d 1240 - Taylor v. Schweiker

Taylor v. Schweiker’s Empirical Analysis

739 F.2d 1240 · 1984

Citation profile

51
cited by 51 later decisions
June 2017
most recently cited

24 federal appellate · 2 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 51 later decisions — most recently June 2017 · most notably Stephens v. Heckler (1985), Bauzo v. Bowen (1986)

24 federal appellate · 2 district ·

3901984199020002010decided

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. § 405 (§ 205 of the Social Security Act of 1935)

Relies on Richardson v. Perales · Califano v. Sanders · Garfield v. Schweiker · Whitney v. Schweiker · Zblewski 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 51 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “more than a mere scintilla. It means such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “the conclusion that her depression does not significantly limit her ability to perform basic work-related functions.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““What we mean by an impairments) that is not severe. (a) Non-severe Impairments). An impairment or combination of impairments is not severe if it does not significantly limit your physical or mental ability to do basic work activities. (b) Basic Work Activities. When we talk about basic work activities, we mean the abilities and aptitudes necessary to do most jobs. Examples of these include— (1) Physical functions such as walking, standing, sitting, lifting, pushing, pulling, reaching, carrying, or handling; (2) Capacities for seeing, hearing, and speaking; (3) Understanding, carrying out, and remembering simple instructions; (4) Use of judgment; (5) Responding appropriately to supervision, co-workers and usual work situations; and (6) Dealing with changes in routine work settings.”
    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.