Sewell v. Bowen’s Empirical Analysis
792 F.2d 1065 · 1986
Citation profile
6 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently February 2013 · most notably Foote v. Chater (1995), Martin v. Sullivan (1990)
6 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
Relies on Richardson v. Perales · Bloodsworth v. Heckler · Walden v. Schweiker · Landry v. Heckler · Parker v. Bowen
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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The new statutory standard for evaluation of pain does not provide a license to the Secretary to deny disability claims where medical evidence in the record clearly indicates the existence of a medical impairment which could reasonably be expected to produce disabling pain. In this situation, the fact finder must evaluate the credibility of claimant’s testimony as to pain, and must express a reasonable basis for rejecting such testimony.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Kent v. Sullivan
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.