Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 885 F.2d 52 - Bailey v. Sullivan

Bailey v. Sullivan’s Empirical Analysis

885 F.2d 52 · 1989

Citation profile

81
cited by 81 later decisions
1
states following
November 2023
most recently cited

29 federal appellate · 11 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 81 later decisions — most recently November 2023 · most notably Titus v. Sullivan (1993), Loza v. Apfel (2000)

29 federal appellate · 11 district · 1 state decisions

52019891990200020102020decided

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 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) · 5 U.S.C. § 552 (Freedom of Information Act) · 5 U.S.C. § 553 (Administrative Procedure Act of 1946) · 5 U.S.C. § 706

Relies on Mathews v. Eldridge · Bowen v. Yuckert · American Pipe & Construction Co. v. Utah · Bowen v. City of New York · Crown, Cork & Seal Co. v. Parker

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

  1. “If the rule in question merely clarifies or explains existing law or regulations, it will be deemed interpretive.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “In determining whether your physical or mental impairment or impairments are of a sufficient medical severity that such impairment or impairments could be the basis of eligibility under the law, we will consider the combined effect of all of your impairments without regard to whether any such impairment, if considered separately, would be of sufficient severity. If we do find a medically severe combination of impairments, the combined impact of the impairments will be considered throughout the disability determination process. If we do not find that you have a medically severe combination of impairments, we will determine that you are not disabled (see § 404.1520).”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “contains merely examples of the application of the [at-issue] regulations”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.