Pickering v. Chater’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 district ·

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

1. “[1] First, the Secretary [now, Commissioner] considers whether the claimant is currently engaged in substantial gamful activity. [2] If he is not, the Secretary next considers whether the elaim-ant has a “severe impairment” which significantly limits his physical or mental ability to do basic work activities. [3] If the claimant suffers such an impairment, the third inquiry is whether, based solely on medical evidence, the claimant has an impairment which is listed in Appendix 1 of the regulations. If the claimant has such an impairment, the Secretary will consider him disabled without considering vocational factors such as age, education, and work experience; the Secretary presumes that a claimant who is afflicted with a “listed” impairment is unable to perform substantial gainful activity. [4] Assuming the claimant does not have a listed impairment, the fourth inquiry is whether, despite the claimant’s severe impairment, he has the residual functional capacity to perform his past work. [5] Finally, if the claimant is unable to perform his past work, the Secretary then determines whether there is other work which the claimant could perform.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 993 F. Supp. 193 - Tejada v. Callahan · 66 F. Supp. 2d 518 - Jones v. Apfel

2. “is not only unable to do his previous work but cannot, considering his age, education, and work experience, engage in any other kind of substantial gainful work which exists in the national economy, regardless of whether such work exists in the immediate area in which he lives, or whether a specific job vacancy exists for him, or whether he would be hired if he applied for work.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 993 F. Supp. 193 - Tejada v. Callahan · 66 F. Supp. 2d 518 - Jones v. Apfel

3. “... walking, standing, sitting, lifting, pushing, pulling, reaching, carrying, or handling ... seeing, hearing, and speaking ... [understanding, carrying out and remembering simple instruction ... [u]se of judgment ... [responding appropriately to supervision, co-workers and usual work situations.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 993 F. Supp. 193 - Tejada v. Callahan · 58 F. Supp. 2d 172 - Craven v. Apfel