Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 799 F.2d 1403 - Cotton v. Bowen

Cotton v. Bowen’s Empirical Analysis

799 F.2d 1403 · 1986

Citation profile

258
cited by 258 later decisions
1
states following
October 2017
most recently cited

129 federal appellate · 24 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 258 later decisions — most recently October 2017 · most notably Magallanes v. Bowen (1989), 15229b v. Dar Lester

129 federal appellate · 24 district · 1 state decisions

10701986199020002010decided

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 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 42 U.S.C. § 405 (§ 205 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 423 (§ 223 of the Social Security Act of 1935)

Relies on Gallant v. Heckler · Murray v. Heckler · Taylor v. Heckler · Miller v. Heckler

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 258 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “it is improper as a matter of law to discredit excess pain testimony solely on the ground that it is not fully corroborated by objective medical findings”
    16 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The ALJ can meet this burden by setting out a detailed and thorough summary of the facts and conflicting clinical evidence, stating his interpretation thereof, and making findings.”
    14 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “If the claimant submits objective medical findings establishing a medical impairment that would normally produce a certain amount of pain, but testifies that [he] experiences pain at a higher level (hereinafter referred to as the claimant's 'excess pain'), the Secretary is free to decide to disbelieve that testimony, but must make specific findings justifying that decision.”
    12 later decisions 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.