Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 764 F.2d 834 - Sryock v. Heckler

Sryock v. Heckler’s Empirical Analysis

764 F.2d 834 · 1985

Citation profile

92
cited by 92 later decisions
September 2018
most recently cited

22 federal appellate · 1 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 92 later decisions — most recently September 2018 · most notably Phillips v. Barnhart (2004), Walker v. Bowen (1987)

22 federal appellate · 1 district ·

3501985199020002010decided

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. § 423 (§ 223 of the Social Security Act of 1935)

Relies on Local 408, International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. National Labor Relations Board · Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Kirk v. Secretary of Health & Human Services · Oldham v. Schweiker

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

  1. “[Exclusive reliance on the grids is not appropriate either when the claimant is unable to perform a full range of work at a given residual functional level or when a claimant has non-exertional impairments that significantly limit basic work skills. This Court has interpreted “significantly limited basic work skills” as limitations that prohibit a claimant from performing “a wide range” of work at a given work level. The ALJ must make a specific finding as to whether the nonexertional limitations are severe enough to preclude a wide range of employment at the given work capacity level indicated by the exertional limitations.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “is free to reject the opinion of any physician when the evidence supports a contrary conclusion.” Sryock v. Heckler, 764 F.2d 834, 835 (11th Cir.1985). The opinion of a treating physician”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “are considered in determining first whether a finding of disabled may be possible based on the strength limitations alone.” 20 C.F.R. pt. 404, subpt. P, app. 2 § 200.00(e)(2). If not, then the grids”
    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.