Klein v. Heckler’s Empirical Analysis
761 F.2d 1304 · 1985
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently September 2007
9 federal appellate · 2 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 18 U.S.C. § 231 (Civil Obedience Act of 1968) · 18 U.S.C. § 287 · 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 42 U.S.C. § 1395A (§ 1802 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 1395G (§ 1815 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 1395U (§ 1842 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 1395Y (§ 1862 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 405 (§ 205 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Califano v. Sanders · Weinberger v. Salfi · Heckler v. Ringer · Mathews v. Diaz · Railway Labor Executives' Ass'n v. Ogilvie
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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Present law does not provide authority for the Secretary to withhold future payments for services furnished by an institutional provider of services, a physician, or any other supplier who either abuses the program or endangers the health of beneficiaries, although payment for past or current claims may be withheld on an individual basis where the services are not reasonable or necessary for treatment of illness or injury or where the supplier fails to provide the necessary payment information”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Under your committee's bill, the Secretary would be given authority to terminate or suspend payments under the medicare program for services rendered by any supplier of health and medical services found to be guilty of program abuses.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[i]f appellants remain dissatisfied after the Secretary issues a final decision, appellants may seek judicial review of the merits of that decision under section 1395y(d)(3).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Klein v. Sullivan
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.