Shaibi v. Berryhill’s Empirical Analysis
883 F.3d 1102 · 2017
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 401 (§ 201 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 405 (§ 205 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Sims v. Apfel · Miller v. Gammie · Bayliss v. Barnhart · Molina v. Astrue · Burch v. Barnhart
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'at least when claimants are represented by counsel, they must raise all issues and evidence at their administrative hearings in order to preserve them on appeal.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“h[e]ld that when a claimant fails entirely to challenge a vocational expert's job numbers during administrative proceedings before the agency, the claimant forfeits such a challenge on appeal, at least when that claimant is represented by counsel.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“need not inquire sua sponte into the foundation for the expert's opinion.”
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.