Lynch v. Rank’s Empirical Analysis
747 F.2d 528 · 1984
Citation profile
20 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1381 (§ 1601 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 1382 (§ 1611 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. § 602 (§ 402 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Consumer Product Safety Commission v. GTE Sylvania, Inc. · United States v. W. T. Grant Co. · Reiter v. Sonotone Corp. · Federal Election Commission v. Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee
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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In addition to other requirements imposed by law as a condition for the approval of any State plan under title XIX of the Social Security Act, there is hereby imposed the requirement (and each such State plan shall be deemed to require) that medical assistance under such plan shall be provided to any individual, for any month after June 1977 for which such individual is entitled to a monthly insurance benefit under title II of such Act but is not eligible for benefits under title XVI of such Act, in like manner and subject to the same terms and conditions as are applicable under such State plan in the case of individuals who are eligible for and receiving benefits under such title XVI for such month, if for such month such individual would be (or could become) eligible for benefits under such title XVI except for amounts of income received by such individual and his spouse (if any) which are attributable to increases in the level of monthly insurance benefits payable under title II of such Act which have occurred pursuant to section 215(i) of such Act, in the case of such individual, since the last month after April 1977 for which such individual was both eligible for (and received) benefits under such title XVI and was entitled to a monthly insurance benefit under such title II, and, in the case of such individual’s spouse (if any), since the last such month for which such spouse was both eligible for (and received) benefits under such title XVI and was entitled to a monthly”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“demonstrate either a combination of probable success on the merits and the possibility of irreparable injury or that serious questions are raised and the balance of hardships tips sharply in that party's favor.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Sudomir v. McMahon“the committee bill would provide that no recipient of SSI would lose eligibility for medicaid as the result of the operation of the cost-of-living benefit increase provision under title II.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Lynch v. Dawson
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.