Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 786 F.2d 844 - Ward v. Heckler

Ward v. Heckler’s Empirical Analysis

786 F.2d 844 · 1986

Citation profile

97
cited by 97 later decisions
September 2015
most recently cited

30 federal appellate · 9 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 97 later decisions — most recently September 2015 · most notably Browning v. Sullivan (1992), Prosch v. Apfel (2000)

30 federal appellate · 9 district ·

4501986199020002010decided

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 Polaski v. Heckler · Polaski v. Heckler · Brand v. Secretary of Department of Health Education and Welfare · Tennant 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 97 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Even statements made by a claimant's treating physician regarding the existence of a disability have been held to be properly discounted in favor of the contrary medical opinion of a consulting physician where the treating physician's statements were conclusory in nature.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “although distracting. . . did not interfere with comprehension of the testimony to an extent that would hinder fair review”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “In sum, the conclusory nature of Dr. Reynolds’ opinion of the severity of Ward’s condition, the contradictory medical evidence supplied by other physicians, and the factual circumstances involved in this case combine to discredit Dr. Reynolds’ conclusions. Viewing the record as a whole, therefore, we conclude that the ALJ’s determination to that effect was supported by substantial evidence.”
    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.