Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 869 F.2d 622 - Dupuis v. Secretary of Health & Human Services

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

869 F.2d 622 · 1989

Citation profile

62
cited by 62 later decisions
1
states following
June 2015
most recently cited

8 federal appellate · 48 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 62 later decisions — most recently June 2015 · most notably Nguyen v. Chater (1999), 122 Wash. 2d 397 - Tapper v. Employment Security Department (1993)

8 federal appellate · 48 district · 1 state decisions

3701989199020002010decided

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

Relies on Rodriguez v. Secretary of Health & Human Services · 14 soc.sec.rep.ser. 301, unempl.ins.rep. Cch 16,883 Ernest S. Avery v. Secretary of Health and Human Services · Beavers v. Secretary of Health, Education & Welfare · United States v. Figueroa · Raymond R. DA ROSA, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Defendant, Appellee

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

  1. “complaints of pain need not be precisely corroborated by objective findings, but they must be consistent with medical findings.”
    9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[T]he Appeals Council is in the same position as the ALJ to evaluate objective medical evidence and it need not defer to the ALJ's interpretation.”
    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.