Taylor v. Heckler’s Empirical Analysis
835 F.2d 1037 · 1987
Citation profile
16 federal appellate · 6 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently May 2020 · most notably Hanover Potato Products, Inc. v. Shalala (1993), Morgan v. Perry (1998)
16 federal appellate · 6 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. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 2412 · 5 U.S.C. § 504 (Equal Access to Justice Act)
Relies on Los Angeles Unified School District v. Los Angeles NAACP · Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency · Sierra Club v. Secretary of the Army · Sorensen v. Fitzgerald · George L. Barry v. Otis R. 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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[i]f either ... position does not bear scrutiny, the prevailing private party should be awarded attorneys' fees.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“In order to prevail [in showing that its position was “substantially justified”], the government must show: 1) a (solid and well-founded) basis in truth for the facts alleged; 2) a (solid and well-founded) basis in law for the theory it prepounded [sic]; and 3) a (solid and well-founded) connection between the facts alleged and the legal theory advanced.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“Careful examination of the Lee opinions and our subsequent decision convinces us that a consistent interpretation of “substantially justified” has been set forth and followed by this Court. Although the idea has been expressed in a variety of ways, our holdings since the reenactment of EAJA have, consistent with the House Report, required more than mere reasonableness. The government must demonstrate that its factual and legal positions in the underlying agency action and in the subsequent litigation have been solid and well-founded if it is to fall within this EAJA exception.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Spence 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.