Fox v. Heckler’s Empirical Analysis
776 F.2d 738 · 1985
Citation profile
10 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently September 2000 · most notably Clifford v. Apfel (2000), Steward v. Bowen (1988)
10 federal appellate · 1 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
Relies on Richardson v. Perales · Garfield v. Schweiker · Zalewski v. Heckler
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 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'Substantial evidence' means "more than a scintilla. It means such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.' " In determining whether the Secretary's findings are supported by substantial evidence, we must examine the evidence in the record "taken as a whole,”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he Social Security Regulations provide that light work requires frequent walk ing or standing, from one-third to two-thirds of a work day. Social Security Ruling 83-10. The worker may sit intermittently during the remaining hours of the day. Id. Moreover, Social Security Rule 83-10 points out that the minimal lifting required by light work (frequent lifting of up to 10 pounds and occasional lifting of no more than 20 pounds) can be accomplished in the majority of jobs involving light work with only occasional bending and stooping. Thus, we hold that a fair reading of the administrative law judge’s comments and the context of his opinion as a whole and in light of Social Security Ruling 83-10 is that, while Fox cannot perform all light jobs, he can perform the majority of them— i.e., those that do not require frequent bending or stooping — and that Fox can alternate walking and standing with periods of sitting while performing light work.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Adams v. Bowen“is proof that a physician designated by the Secretary has considered the question of whether the claimant's impairments are medically equivalent to an impairment as described in the Listing of Impairments.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Steward v. Bowen
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.