Hollohan v. Heckler’s Empirical Analysis
805 F.2d 143 · 1986
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 26 U.S.C. § 162 · 42 U.S.C. § 402 (§ 202 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 411 (§ 211 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Arizona v. California · McDowell v. Ribicoff · Delno v. Celebrezze · Gajewski v. Commissioner · Maloney v. Celebrezze
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“we do not adopt the defendant’s argument that one cannot be engaged in a trade or business if working or rendering services for only one customer”
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.