Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 757 F.2d 803 - Sherrill v. Secretary of Health & Human Services

Sherrill v. Secretary of Health & Human Services’s Empirical Analysis

757 F.2d 803 · 1985

Citation profile

45
cited by 45 later decisions
January 2019
most recently cited

22 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 45 later decisions — most recently January 2019 · most notably 15093b v. Dar a Crane, 804 F. Supp. 914 - Reed v. Secretary of Health and Human Services (1992)

22 federal appellate ·

2401985199020002010decided

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. § 402 (§ 202 of the Social Security Act of 1935)

Relies on Richardson v. Perales · Consolidated Edison Co of New York v. National Labor Relations Board · Allen v. Califano

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 45 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “by the administrative law judge's reevaluation of the validity of McPeek's IQ scores, the district court concluded that the administrative law judge properly determined that McPeek functioned in the borderline range throughout her life. Accordingly, the district court granted summary judgment in favor of the Secretary. This timely appeal followed. 9 The only issue before this Court is whether the district court's conclusion that McPeek functioned on an intellectual level above the mental retardation range before age twenty-two is supported by substantial evidence. Substantial evidence”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “alone does not rise to the level of substantial evidence establishing the nonexistence of [the] impairment.”
    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.