Willis v. Sullivan’s Empirical Analysis
931 F.2d 390 · 1991
Citation profile
92 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 290 later decisions — most recently May 2019 · most notably Simpson v. Lear Astronics Corp. (1996), Swan v. Clinton (1996)
92 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. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1361 · 28 U.S.C. § 2412 · 42 U.S.C. § 1320A (§ 1127 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 1381 (§ 1601 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 1382 (§ 1611 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 1383 (§ 1631 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 401 (§ 201 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Mathews v. Eldridge · Richardson v. Perales · Thomas v. Arn · Pierce v. Underwood · Weinberger v. Salfi
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 290 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“‘[OJnly those specific objections to the magistrate’s report made to the district court will be preserved for appellate review ...”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“'justified in substance or in the main'--that is, justified to a degree that could satisfy a reasonable person.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“Except as otherwise specifically provided by statute, a court shall award to a prevailing party other than the United States fees and other expenses, in addition to any costs awarded pursuant to [ 28 U.S.C. § 2412 ] subsection (a), incurred by that party in any civil action (other than cases sounding in tort), including proceedings for judicial review of agency action, brought by or against the United States in any court having jurisdiction of that action, unless the court finds that the position of the United States was substantially justified or that special circumstances make the award unjust.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.