Oberlander v. Perales’s Empirical Analysis
740 F.2d 116 · 1984
Citation profile
39 federal appellate · 7 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 100 later decisions — most recently July 2016 · most notably Joseph Locurto v. Howard Safir Commissioner of the New York City (2001), Plaza Health Laboratories, Inc. v. Perales (1989)
39 federal appellate · 7 district · 5 state decisions
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. § 1320C (§ 1151 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 1396 (§ 1900 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 1396A (§ 1902 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth · Mathews v. Eldridge · Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co. · Edelman v. Jordan · Parratt v. Taylor
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 100 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“for services already performed in reliance on a duly promulgated [Medicaid] reimbursement rate,”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“there is no authority anywhere supporting the proposition that a state Medicaid regulation becomes a federal law merely by virtue of its inclusion in a state plan required by federal law.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“specific conflict between a state plan or practice on one hand and a federal mandate on the other.”
4 later decisions 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.