Abbey v. Sullivan’s Empirical Analysis
978 F.3d 37 · 1992
Citation profile
17 federal appellate · 5 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 59 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2019 · most notably Shalala Secretary of Health and Human Services v. Illinois Council on Long Term Care Inc (2000), Lin Zhong v. United States Department of Justice (2006)
17 federal appellate · 5 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
Relies on Mathews v. Eldridge · Ashwander v. Tennessee Valley Authority · Weinberger v. Salfi · Myers v. Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corp. · McKart v. United States
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 59 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) Any individual dissatisfied with any determination under subsection (a) of this section as to— (C) the amount of benefits under Part A ... of this subchapter (including a determination where such amount is determined to be zero) ... shall be entitled to a hear ing thereon by the Secretary to the same extent as is provided in section 405(b) of this title and to judicial review of the Secretary’s final decision after such a hearing as is provided in section 405(g) of this title.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Exhaustion is generally required as a matter of preventing premature interference with agency processes, so that the agency may function efficiently and so that it may have an opportunity to correct its own errors, to afford the parties and the courts the benefit of its experience and expertise, and to compile a record which is adequate for judicial review.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) requiring exhaustion would ‘occasion undue prejudice to subsequent assertion of a court action’; (2) the administrative remedy is inadequate because the agency cannot give effective relief, e.g., (a) ‘it lacks institutional competence to resolve the particular type of issue presented, such as the constitutionality of a statute’; (b) the challenge is to ‘the adequacy of the agency procedure itself’; or (c) the agency lack[s] authority to grant the type of relief requested,’ or when “the claim is collateral to a demand for benefits” or”
2 later decisions 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.