Pittman v. Sullivan’s Empirical Analysis
911 F.2d 42 · 1990
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently July 2018
2 federal appellate · 2 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 42 U.S.C. § 404 (§ 204 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 406 (§ 206 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 407 (§ 207 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 423 (§ 223 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on United States v. Mitchell · Califano v. Yamasaki · Ruckelshaus v. Sierra Club · Maggio v. Zeitz · United States v. Rylander
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Because “the Secretary’s fee awards are not judicially renewable, the district court likewise has no authority to force the Secretary to comply with an award the court did not issue.” Russell, 887 F.2d at 171 . Therefore, the district court had no authority to order the Secretary to pay [the attorney] the authorized fee, or to direct the Secretary to recoup that amount from [the SSA benefits recipient] and pay it over to [the attorney].”
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.