Rosario v. Apfel’s Empirical Analysis
2000
Citation profile
4 district ·
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 405 (§ 205 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 423 (§ 223 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Richardson v. Perales · Consolidated Edison Co of New York v. National Labor Relations Board · Rodriguez v. Secretary of Health & Human Services · Goodermote v. Secretary of Health & Human Services · Berrios Lopez 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.
“The First Circuit has held 27 . . . that when a treating doctor's opinion is inconsistent with other substantial evidence in the record, the requirement of controlling weight does not apply.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Young v. SSA
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.