Fox v. Apfel’s Empirical Analysis
1997
Citation profile
3 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 401 (§ 201 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Polaski v. Heckler · Woolf v. Shalala · Brand v. Secretary of Department of Health Education and Welfare · Brinker v. Weinberger · Smith v. Shalala
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In the opinion of this Court [sic], the case at bar does not turn on whether or not Plaintiff is [financially] motivated to qualify for benefits. Were Plaintiff not motivated to qualify for benefits, she probably would not have made an application.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Ramirez 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.