George FRIEDMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SECRETARY OF the DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Defendant-Appellee’s Empirical Analysis
819 F.2d 42 · 1987
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 7 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently September 2015 · most notably Keefe v. Shalala (1995), Almy v. Sebelius (2012)
7 federal appellate · 7 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. § 1395D (§ 1812 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 1395F (§ 1814 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 1395G (§ 1815 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 1395X (§ 1861 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 1395Y (§ 1862 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 405 (§ 205 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Consolidated Edison Co of New York v. National Labor Relations Board · Blum v. Yaretsky · Rodriguez v. Secretary of Health & Human Services · Rivera v. Schweiker · Schisler 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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he propose of the custodial care disqualification in § 1395y(a)(9) was not to disentitle old, chronically ill and basically helpless, bewildered and confused people ... from the broad remedy which Congress intended to provide for our senior citizens. Rather, the provision was intended to stop cold-blooded and thoughtless relatives from relegating an oldster who could care for him or herself to the care of an [SNF] merely so that that oldster would have a place to eat, sleep, or watch television. But when a person is sick, especially a helpless old person, and when those who love that person are not skilled enough to take care of that person, Congress has provided a remedy in the Medicare Act, and that remedy should not be eclipsed by an application of the law and findings of fact which are blinded by bureaucratic economics to the purpose of the Congress.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) [a]re ordered by a physician; (2) [r]equire the skills of technical or professional personnel such as registered nurses, licensed practical (vocational) nurses, physical therapists, occupational therapists, and speech pathologists or audiologists; and (3) [a]re furnished directly by, or under the supervision of, such personnel.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“once coverage is established, the provider of services, not the patient, is responsible for obtaining the necessary physicians' certifications, and for bearing the risk of nonpayment if such certifications are unavailable.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Hurley 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.