Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 823 F.2d 679 - Clay v. Secretary of Health & Human Services

Clay v. Secretary of Health & Human Services’s Empirical Analysis

823 F.2d 679 · 1987

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
August 1990
most recently cited

1 federal appellate ·

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2412 · 42 U.S.C. § 1383 (§ 1631 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 405 (§ 205 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 406 (§ 206 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 407 (§ 207 of the Social Security Act of 1935)

Relies on Liegl v. Webb · Celebrezze v. Sparks · Reid v. Heckler · Motley v. Heckler · McCarthy v. Secretary of Health & Human Services

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.

  1. “Whenever a court renders a judgment favorable to a claimant under this subchapter who was represented before the court by an attorney, the court may determine and allow as part of its judgment a reasonable fee for such representation, not in excess of 25 percent of the total of the past-due benefits to which the claimant is entitled by reason of such judgment, and the Secretary may, notwithstanding the provisions of section 405(i) of this title, certify the amount of such fee for payment to such attorney out of, and not in addition to, the amount of such past-due benefits.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “the Secretary can either recoup such funds from the state [to which they were paid as reimbursement] or bear the burden of recovering the attorneys' fees from the claimant for payment to counsel”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “subject to execution, levy, attachment, garnishment, or other legal process.”
    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.