Jernigan v. Sullivan’s Empirical Analysis
948 F.2d 1070 · 1991
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 4 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 52 later decisions — most recently March 2018 · most notably Cox v. Apfel (1998), Johnson v. Chater (1997)
8 federal appellate · 4 district · 2 state decisions
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. § 1382C (§ 1614 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 416 (§ 216 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Richardson v. Perales · Consolidated Edison Co of New York v. National Labor Relations Board · Polaski v. Heckler · Benskin v. Bowen · Baker v. Heckler
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 52 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“unemployment compensation benefits adversely affects his credibility,”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[a] claimant may admit an ability to work by applying for unemployment compensation benefits because such an applicant must hold himself out as available, willing and able to work.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Johnson v. Chater“the claimant must show he was under a continuing disability while his application was pending.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Dukes v. Barnhart
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.