Switzer v. Heckler’s Empirical Analysis
742 F.2d 382 · 1984
Citation profile
21 federal appellate · 6 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 48 later decisions — most recently September 2018 · most notably Hamlin v. Barnhart (2004), Bauzo v. Bowen (1986)
21 federal appellate · 6 district ·
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 · Garfield v. Schweiker · Whitney v. Schweiker · Miranda v. Secretary of Health, Education & Welfare · Allen v. Weinberger
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 48 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he Secretary's attempt to use only the portions [of a doctor's report] favorable to her position, while ignoring other parts, is improper.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“once having found a disability, the Secretary may not terminate the benefits without substantial evidence to justify doing so. This will normally consist of current evidence showing that a claimant has improved to the point of being able to engage in substantial gainful activity; but it might also consist of evidence that claimant’s condition is not as serious as was at first supposed.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Soper v. Heckler
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.