Starks v. Bowen’s Empirical Analysis
873 F.2d 187 · 1989
Citation profile
8 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently January 2008
8 federal appellate ·
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 McMillian v. Schweiker · Dixon v. Heckler · Dollar v. Bowen · Talbott v. Bowen · Glenn 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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“cannot read or write a simple message such as instructions or inventory lists even though the person can sign his or her name. Generally an illiterate person has had little or no formal schooling.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“There is simply no indication that [plaintiff] could `write a simple message such as instructions or inventory lists,' a prerequisite [for a finding of literacy] under the regulations”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“the claimant is able to read and write only very simple messages.”
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.