Landry v. Heckler’s Empirical Analysis
782 F.2d 1551 · 1986
Citation profile
40 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 95 later decisions — most recently September 2016 · most notably Duncan v. Secretary of Health & Human Services (1986), Luna v. Bowen (1987)
40 federal appellate ·
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 Smith v. Schweiker · Boyd v. Heckler · Simpson v. Schweiker · Gaultney v. Weinberger
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 95 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]here must be evidence of an underlying medical condition and (1) there must be objective medical evidence to confirm the severity of the alleged pain arising from that condition or (2) the objectively determined medical condition must be of a severity which can reasonably be expected to give rise to the alleged pain.”
11 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“whether objective medical impairments could reasonably be expected to produce the pain complained of.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Caulder v. Bowen · Smith v. Bowen“An individual’s statement as to pain or other symptoms shall not alone be conclusive evidence of disability ... there must be medical signs and findings ... which show the existence of a medical impairment ... or which could reasonably be expected to produce the pain or other symptoms alleged____ Objective medical evidence of pain or other symptoms established by medically acceptable clinical or laboratory techniques ... must be considered in reaching a conclusion as to whether the individual is under a disability.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Rivera 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.