Draper v. Sullivan’s Empirical Analysis
899 F.2d 1127 · 1990
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently May 2016
6 federal appellate · 1 district ·
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 28 U.S.C. § 46 · 42 U.S.C. § 405 (§ 205 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 424A (§ 224 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
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.
“Res judicata applies in an administrative law context following a trial type hearing. See 2 Kenneth Culp Davis & Richard J. Pierce, Jr., Administrative Law Treatise § 18.8 (3d ed. 1994) (“When an agency conducts a trial-type hearing, makes findings, and applies the law, the reasons for treating its decision as res judicata are the same as the reasons for applying res judicata to a decision of a court that has used the same procedure.”) In the instant case, the first hearing before the ALJ was a trial-type hearing. A hearing before a social security ALJ is similar to a judicial trial but differs because the Commissioner is not represented and the claimant is rarely represented by counsel. However, an ALJ hearing approximates a judicial trial in one important aspect: it serves as an adjudication of whether a claimant is entitled to social security benefits. The ALJ hearing resolves a disputed faet-whether a particular claimant is entitled to social security benefits. The claimant has the opportunity to present evidence in support of his or her claim that he or she deserves social security benefits. A decision concerning a claimant’s eligibility for social security benefits is an “initial determination” under social security regulations. 20 C.F.R. § 404.902 . An initial determination is binding unless the claimant requests reconsideration or the Commissioner revises its decision. 20 C.F.R. § 404.905 . An initial determination is subject to the doctrine of administrative res judi”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“is a determination made by the Secretary about a claimant's entitlement to benefits which gives the claimant the right to further review. 20 C.F.R. 404.900(a)(1); 20 C.F.R. 404.902. Determinations of entitlement or continuing entitlement to benefits ... are”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“is binding unless the claimant requests a reconsideration within the statutory period or the Secretary revises or reopens the”
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.