Battles v. Sullivan’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 federal appellate ·

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

1. “'[T]he relevant analysis is whether the claimant was actually disabled prior to the expiration of her insured status.'”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Jamie Brantley v. Donna E. Shalala, Secretary, Department of Health & Human Services · Sybil T. Miller v. Shirley S. Chater, Commissioner of the Social Security Administration

2. “(2) Determining whether you can do your past relevant work. We will ask you for information about work you have done in the past. We may also ask other people who know about your work. (See § 404.1565(b).) We may use the services of vocational experts or vocational specialists, or other resources, such as the "Dictionary of Occupational Titles" and its companion volumes and supplements, published by the Department of Labor, to obtain evidence we need to help us determine whether you can do your past relevant work, given your residual functional capacity. A vocational expert or specialist may offer relevant evidence within his or her expertise or knowledge concerning the physical and mental demands of a claimant's past relevant work, either as the claimant actually performed it or as generally performed in the national economy. Such evidence may be helpful in supplementing or evaluating the accuracy of the claimant's description of his past work. In addition, a vocational expert or specialist may offer expert opinion testimony in response to a hypothetical question about whether a person with the physical and mental limitations imposed by the claimant's medical impairment(s) can meet the demands of the claimant's previous work, either as the claimant actually performed it or as generally performed in the national economy. (3) If you can do your past relevant work. If we find that you have the residual functional capacity to do your past relevant work, we will determine that yo”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 708 F. Supp. 2d 941 - Rosa v. Astrue · Groeper v. Sullivan

3. “1. Woods has not engaged in substantial gainful activity since November 28, 2006, the amended alleged onset date. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.971 et seq. 2. Woods has the following severe impairment: bipolar disorder. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920 . 3. Woods does not have an impairment or combination of impairments that meets or medically equals one of the listed impairments in 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.925 and 416.926. 4. Woods has the residual functional capacity to perform a full range of work at all exertional levels but is limited to simple routine repetitive tasks with limitation to low-stress tasks that permit occasional changes in the work setting and occasional exercise of judgment, no production rate and pace work, occasional interaction with the public and coworkers, and limit to superficial, non-confrontational and non-arbitration/negotiation types of interaction. 5. Woods is capable of performing past relevant work as a factory laborer. This work does not require the performance of work-related activities precluded by Woods' residual functional capacity. 20 C.F.R. § 416.965 . 6. Woods has not been under a disability as defined in the Social Security Act since November 28, 2006, the date the application was filed. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920 (f).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Woods v. Astrue