Case Citator › Gisbrecht v. Barnhart

Gisbrecht v. Barnhart

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Criticized by some courts
Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Citation
535 U.S. 789
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
317 of 317
Citing cases (total)
4,553
Treatment dates
2006
Criticized by some courts
At least one reviewed court has criticized this case’s reasoning. No reviewed court has overruled it. All 317 flagged citations have been read. Ellick v. Barnhart criticized Gisbrecht v. Barnhart for leaving courts without a uniform rule for reasonable attorney fees; that treatment is listed below.
More on how this was screened

The other citing opinions applied Gisbrecht's reasonableness framework, discussed its treatment of earlier precedent, or addressed unrelated authorities. Two vacated opinions were excluded from treatment.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

4,553 later cases cite Gisbrecht v. Barnhart; 317 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on Gisbrecht v. Barnhart?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Criticized

  • The court criticized Gisbrecht for leaving district courts without a uniform rule for reasonable attorney fees.

    Ellick v. Barnhart · C.D. Cal. · filed

    Justice Scalia’s concern may have been well-founded. To date, there have been 43 reported decisions applying Gisbrecht to section 406(b) fee requests. A survey of these cases reveals considerable divergence and scant evidence of any “uniform rule of law.”
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Gisbrecht v. Barnhart and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace