Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 768 F.2d 172 - Scott v. Heckler

Scott v. Heckler’s Empirical Analysis

768 F.2d 172 · 1985

Citation profile

43
cited by 43 later decisions
3
states following
December 2012
most recently cited

20 federal appellate · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 43 later decisions — most recently December 2012 · most notably Mullen v. Bowen (1986), Delgado v. Bowen (1986)

20 federal appellate · 4 state decisions

3101985199020002010decided

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. § 1382C (§ 1614 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 205 · 42 U.S.C. § 405 (§ 205 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 423 (§ 223 of the Social Security Act of 1935)

Relies on Richardson v. Perales · Consolo v. Federal Maritime Commission · Vitarelli v. Seaton · Stephens v. Heckler · Garfield 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 43 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “`For once an agency exercises its discretion and creates the procedural rules under which it desires to have its actions judged, it denies itself the right to violate these rules. If an agency in its proceedings violates its rules and prejudice results, any action taken as a result of the proceedings cannot stand.'”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[w]hen the Secretary fails to exercise properly her authority to review [under Sec. 404.970(a) ] ..., then it is the ALJ's decision and not the Appeals Council's, which constitutes the Secretary's final decision for purposes of our review.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “an obligation to determine whether the own motion review conducted by the Appeals Council was in fact justified under the standard by which the Council justified it in theory.”
    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.