Dorf v. Bowen’s Empirical Analysis
794 F.2d 896 · 1986
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently July 2019 · most notably Holbrook v. Lykes Bros. Steamship Co. (1996), Motter v. Everest & Jennings, Inc. (1989)
6 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
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 423 (§ 223 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Cotter v. Harris · Smith v. Califano · Dobrowolsky v. Califano · Kent v. Schweiker · Green 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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[i]f there is no substantial evidence that [a plaintiff] can perform even sedentary work[,] nothing would be gained by remanding for a hearing addressed to [the fifth step of the sequential framework].”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“'Substantial evidence' means 'more than a scintilla. It means such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.'”
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.