Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 848 F.2d 901 - Thorbus v. Bowen

Thorbus v. Bowen’s Empirical Analysis

848 F.2d 901 · 1988

Citation profile

25
cited by 25 later decisions
January 2015
most recently cited

10 federal appellate · 6 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently January 2015 · most notably 63 F. Supp. 2d 1 - Vencor Nursing Centers, L.P. v. Shalala (1999), Anderson v. Sullivan (1992)

10 federal appellate · 6 district ·

1001988199020002010decided

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. § 1331 · 42 U.S.C. § 1320A (§ 1128 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 1320C (§ 1156 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 Mathews v. Eldridge · Weinberger v. Salfi · Bowen v. City of New York · Dataphase Systems, Inc. v. C L Systems, Inc. · Koerpel 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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “(1) raise a colorable constitutional claim collateral to his substantive claim of entitlement; (2) show that he would be irreparably harmed by enforcement of the exhaustion requirement; and (3) show that the purposes of the exhaustion requirement would not be served by requiring further administrative procedures.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “'function efficiently and ... have an opportunity to correct its own errors, to afford the parties and the courts the benefit of [the Secretary's] experience and expertise, and to compile a record [that] is adequate for judicial review.'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “assume[d] without deciding that [petitioner's due process claim is] sufficiently colorable for the purposes of jurisdiction in federal court,”
    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.