Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 814 F.2d 585 - Jamison v. Bowen

Jamison v. Bowen’s Empirical Analysis

814 F.2d 585 · 1987

Citation profile

42
cited by 42 later decisions
1
states following
January 2024
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently January 2024 · most notably Foote v. Chater (1995), Dyer v. Barnhart (2005)

3 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

25019871990200020102020decided

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 · Brady v. Heckler · McDaniel v. Bowen · 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 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[I]n order to make [the court’s] review meaningful, [the court] must be able to determine'what statutory and regulatory requirements the ALJ did in fact apply — where [the court] cannot do that we must vacate and require a remand to the [Commissioner] for clarification.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “particular phrases or formulations ... broad findings that [a claimant] lacked credibility and could return to her past work alone are not enough to enable us to conclude that [the ALJ] considered her medical condition as a whole.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “`not enough to enable [the district court or this Court] to conclude that [the ALJ] considered her medical condition as a whole.'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.