Hernandez-Zuniga v. United States, 531 U.S. 1038 (2000). · Go Syfert
Search
Hernandez-Zuniga v. United States, 531 U.S. 1038 (2000). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
99 citation events (98 in the last 25 years) across 14 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Warner v. Astrue (cacd, 2012-04-26)
Treatment trajectory · 2001 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2001 2013 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 9 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" Warner v. Astrue
C.D. Cal. · 2012 · signal: see · confidence high
See Harman v. Apfel, 211 F.3d 1172, 1179-80 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 1038 , 121 S.Ct. 628 , 148 L.Ed.2d 537 (2000) (reviewing court properly may consider materials submitted to the Appeals Council when the Appeals Council addressed the materials in denying review); Ramirez v. Shalala, 8 F.3d 1449, 1452 (9th Cir.1993) (“Ramirez”) (“although the Appeals Council declined to review the decision of the ALJ, it reached this ruling after considering the case on the merits; examining the entire record, including the additional material; and concluding that the ALJ’s decision was prop…
cited Cited "see" JONKER v. Astrue
C.D. Cal. · 2010 · signal: see · confidence high
See Harman v. Apfel, 211 F.3d 1172, 1179 (9th Cir.2000), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 1038 , 121 S.Ct. 628 , 148 L.Ed.2d 537 (2000); Kail v. Heckler, 722 F.2d 1496, 1497 (9th Cir.1984).
discussed Cited "see" Gomez v. Astrue
C.D. Cal. · 2010 · signal: see · confidence high
See Harman v. Apfel, 211 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir.) (holding that the district court’s decision whether to remand for further proceedings or payment of benefits is discretionary and is subject to review for abuse of discretion), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 1038 , 121 S.Ct. 628 , 148 L.Ed.2d *1063 537 (2000).
discussed Cited "see" Jenkins v. Astrue
C.D. Cal. · 2009 · signal: see · confidence high
See Harman v. Apfel, 211 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir.) (holding that the district court’s decision whether to remand for further proceedings or payment of benefits is discretionary and is subject to review for abuse of discretion), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 1038 , 121 S.Ct. 628 , 148 L.Ed.2d 537 (2000).
cited Cited "see" Peake v. Chevron Shipping Co.
9th Cir. · 2007 · signal: see · confidence high
See Harman v. Apfel, 211 F.3d 1172, 1175 (9th Cir.2000), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 1038 , 121 S.Ct. 628 , 148 L.Ed.2d 537 (2000).
discussed Cited "see" Lange v. Apfel
9th Cir. · 2002 · signal: see · confidence high
See Harman v. Apfel, 211 F.3d 1172, 1179-80 (9th Cir.2000) (holding that the court could consider additional materials that the ALJ did not have because the materials had been submitted to and addressed by the Appeals Council), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 1038 , 121 S.Ct. 628 , 148 L.Ed.2d 537 (2002); Smith v. Bowen, 849 F.2d 1222, 1225 (9th Cir.1988) (holding that medical evaluations made after the expiration of a claimant's insured status are relevant to an evaluation of the pre-expiration condition). .
cited Cited "see" Walker v. Barnhart
9th Cir. · 2002 · signal: see · confidence high
See Harman v. Apfel, 211 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir.2000), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 1038 , 121 S.Ct. 628 , 148 L.Ed.2d 537 (2000).
discussed Cited "see" Booth v. Barnhart
C.D. Cal. · 2002 · signal: see · confidence high
See Harman v. Apfel, 211 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir.) (holding that the district court’s decision whether to remand for further proceedings or payment of benefits is discretionary and is subject to review for abuse of discretion), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 1038 , 121 S.Ct. 628 , 148 L.Ed.2d 537 (2000).
cited Cited "see" UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. MARECO D. HARRIS
unknown court · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Hernandez-Zuniga, 215 F.3d 483, 487-89 (5th Cir.), cert denied, 531 U.S. 1038 (2000).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Hernandez-Zuniga
v.
United States
No. 00-5362.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Dec 4, 2000.
531 U.S. 1038
Published

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.