Stokes v. Bowen’s Empirical Analysis
811 F.2d 814 · 1987
Citation profile
11 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently June 2011
11 federal appellate · 2 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 28 U.S.C. § 2412
Relies on Green v. Schweiker · Dougherty v. Lehman · Washington v. Heckler · Citizens Council v. Brinegar · Brinker v. Guiffrida
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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) [A] reasonable basis in truth for the facts alleged; (2) a reasonable basis in law for the theory [the Government] propounds; and (3) a reasonable connection between the facts alleged and the legal theory advanced.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“agency action found to be ... unsupported by substantial evidence is virtually certain not to have been substantially justified under the Act. Only the most extraordinary circumstances could permit such an action to be found substantially justified under the Act.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“First, [the government must] show that there is a reasonable basis in truth for the facts alleged in the pleadings. If no such basis for the government’s factual allegations exist [sic], then the government’s position may well be held not to be ‘substantially justified.’ Second, the government must show that there exists a reasonable basis in law for the theory which it propounds. This is not to say that the government need demonstrate that there is a substantial probability that the legal theory advanced by it will succeed.... Finally, the government must show that the facts alleged will reasonably support the legal theory advanced. Thus, having met these requirements, if the government’s legal theory, as applied to the facts, reasonably supports the Secretary’s position, even though the government may not have ultimately prevailed, then the government will have proven that the ‘position of the United States was substantially justified.’ 28 U.S.C. § 2412 (d)(1)(A).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Matter v. Bowen
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.