Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 828 F.2d 71 - Robinson v. Bowen

Robinson v. Bowen’s Empirical Analysis

828 F.2d 71 · 1987

Citation profile

29
cited by 29 later decisions
1
states following
October 1993
most recently cited

15 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1382 (§ 1611 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 1382A (§ 1612 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 1382C (§ 1614 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 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. § 407 (§ 207 of the Social Security Act of 1935)

Relies on Udall v. Tallman · Watt v. Alaska · Schweiker v. Gray Panthers · Schweiker v. Wilson · Heckler v. Turner

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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[A]ny payments received as an annuity, pension, retirement, or disability benefit, including veterans’ compensation and pensions, workmen’s compensation payments, old age, survivors, and disability insurance benefits, railroad retirement annuities and pensions, and unemployment insurance benefits.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “we affirm the judgment of the district court, substantially for the reasons set out in Judge Weinfeld’s opinion below, Robinson v. Bowen, 650 F.Supp. 1495 (S.D.N.Y.1987).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[i]n determining the amount of unearned income the amount actually available to the individual is considered.”
    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.