Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 921 F.2d 642 - Crum v. Sullivan

Crum v. Sullivan’s Empirical Analysis

921 F.2d 642 · 1990

Citation profile

60
cited by 60 later decisions
March 2020
most recently cited

31 federal appellate · 2 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 60 later decisions — most recently March 2020 · most notably Howard v. Secretary of Health & Human Services (1991), Key v. Callahan (1997)

31 federal appellate · 2 district ·

3301990200020102020decided

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. § 421 (§ 221 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 423 (§ 223 of the Social Security Act of 1935)

Relies on Richardson v. Perales · Garner v. Heckler · Mullen v. Bowen · United States v. Brawner · Houston v. Secretary of Health & Human Services

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

  1. “is charged with the duty to weigh the evidence [and] to resolve material conflicts in the testimony.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[a]n initial determination under subsection (a), (c), (g), or (i) of this section that an individual is not under a disability, in any case where there is evidence which indicates the existence of a mental impairment, shall be made only if the Commissioner of Social Security has made every reasonable effort to ensure that a qualified psychiatrist or psychologist has completed the medical portion of the case review and any applicable residual functional capacity assessment.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “See Richardson v. Perales, 402 U.S. 389 , 401 (1971). Substantial evidence is such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion. See Consolidated Edison Co. v. NLRB, 305 U.S. 197 , 229 (1938). Substantial evidence”
    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.