Case Citator › Walter Johnson v. Kenneth S. Apfel, Commissioner of Social Security

Walter Johnson v. Kenneth S. Apfel, Commissioner of Social Security

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

Good law
Court
Seventh Circuit
Citation
189 F.3d 561
Decided
Confirmed treatments
0
Flagged citations read
111 of 111
Citing cases (total)
221
Good law
Every flagged citation to this case has been read, and none of them overrules, limits, or questions it. Walter Johnson v. Kenneth S. Apfel, Commissioner of Social Security remains good law: all 111 flagged citations have been read, and none shows adverse treatment of the decision. Most opinions report that Johnson overruled earlier Seventh Circuit decisions requiring Social Security claimants to present each issue to the Appeals Council.
More on how this was screened

The Supreme Court cited Johnson as one side of the circuit split in Sims v. Apfel and reached the same result. Other citing opinions apply Johnson or direct nearby negative language at unrelated authorities; vacated Combs panel opinions did not treat Johnson.

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.

221 later cases cite Walter Johnson v. Kenneth S. Apfel, Commissioner of Social Security; 111 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 Walter Johnson v. Kenneth S. Apfel, Commissioner of Social Security?

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.

No reviewed court has overruled or limited this case.

Every one of the 111 flagged citations was read, and each turned out to be something other than adverse treatment: a routine application, a party's argument the court rejected, or the case itself discussing older law. That reading is the finding this page exists to report.

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Walter Johnson v. Kenneth S. Apfel, Commissioner of Social Security 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