Hogan v. Heckler’s Empirical Analysis
769 F.2d 886 · 1985
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 5 district · 8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 21 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2019
6 federal appellate · 5 district · 8 state decisions
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 28 U.S.C. § 1292 · 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. § 1396B (§ 1903 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 1396D (§ 1905 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 602 (§ 402 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Batterton v. Francis · Schweiker v. Gray Panthers · Clifford Macevoy Co v. United States · New York State Department of Social Services v. Dublino · United States v. Rutherford
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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"... (T)hat if medical assistance is included for any group of individuals described in section 1396d(a) of this title who are not described in subparagraph (A) or (E), then— (i) the plan must include a description .of ... the single standard to be employed in determining income and resource eligibility for all such groups, and the methodology to be employed in determining such eligibility shall be no more restrictive than the methodology which would be employed under the supplemental security program ... and which shall be no more restrictive than the methodology which would be employed under the appropriate State plan ..."”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““States are no longer required to apply a uniform methodology for treating income and resources in such matters as deemed income, interest, court-ordered support payments, and infrequent and irregular income. Rather, the State plan must specify the methodology that will be used, and that methodology must be reasonable.” 46 Fed.Reg. 47980 (1981).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Willey v. Ives · Atkins v. Rivera“except to the extent prescribed by the Secretary”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
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.