Travers v. Sullivan’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
3 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently December 2010
3 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
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1320A (§ 1128 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 1395 (§ 1801 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 405 (§ 205 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corporation · Tw Electrical Service Inc Nn v. Pacific Electrical Contractors Association · Rivera v. United States
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(a) Mandatory exclusion The Secretary shall exclude the following individuals and entities from participation in any program under subchapter XVIII [42 USCS §§ 1395 et seq.] and shall direct that the following individuals and entities be excluded from participation in any State health care program (as defined in subsection (h)): (2)Conviction relating to patient abuse Any individual or entity that has been convicted, under Federal or State law, of a criminal offense relating to neglect or abuse of patients in connection with the delivery of a health care item or service. (c) Notice, effective date, and period of exclusion (3)(B) In the ease of an exclusion under subsection (a) * * *, the minimum period of exclusion shall be not less than five years, ... (i)“Convicted” defined For purposes of subsections (a) and (b) * * *, an individual or entity is considered to have been “convicted” of a criminal offense— (1) when a judgment of conviction has been entered against individual or entity by a Federal, State, or local court, regardless of whether there is an appeal pending or whether the judgment of conviction or other record relating to criminal conduct has been expunged; (2) when there has been a finding of guilt against the individual or entity by a Federal, State, or local court; (3) when a plea of guilty or nolo contendere by the individual or entity has been accepted by a Federal, State, or local court; or (4) when the individual or entity has entered into participation in ”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1320a-7(f), which incorporates 42 U.S.C. § 405 , this court has jurisdiction to review administrative decisions ...” (internal quotation marks omitted)); Travers v. Sullivan (”
1 later decision 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.