Cheryl A. SMITH, Appellant, v. Richard S. SCHWEIKER, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Appellee (1984)
green
· 66 citation events
across 10 courts.
Showing the 29 strongest citers on record
(one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 1984 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
198420052026
Sort:
By significance ·
Most recent
green
James Gladden v. Commissioner, SSA (1998)
Smith v. Schweiker, 728 F.2d 1158, 1161 (8th Cir. 1984).
green
James GLADDEN, Appellant, v. John J. CALLAHAN, Acting Commissioner, Social Security Administration, Appellee (1998)
Smith v. Schweiker, 728 F.2d 1158, 1161 (8th Cir.1984).
green
Margie M. PENN, Appellant, v. Louis W. SULLIVAN, M.D., Secretary of Health and Human Services, Appellee (1990)
Smith v. Schweiker, 728 F.2d 1158, 1163 (8th Cir.1984).
green
Parsons v. Heckler (1984)
Substantial evidence is defined as "relevant evidence that a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion." Smith v. Schweiker, 728 F.2d 1158, 1162 (8th Cir.1984).
green
Parsons v. Heckler (1984)
Substantial evidence is defined as “relevant evidence that a reasonable mind might accept as adequate. to support a conclusion.” Smith v. Schweiker, 728 F.2d 1158, 1162 (8th Cir. 1984).
Kuzmin v. Schweiker, 714 F.2d 1233, 1237 (3d Cir.1983). 5 We agree with these courts that, because the Secretary may not terminate benefits merely upon a reappraisal of the prior evidence, Smith, supra, 728 F.2d at 1162, a rebuttable presumption of continuing disability is required.
green
Jerry v. CLARK, Appellant, v. Margaret v. HECKLER, Secretary of Health & Human Services, Appellee (1984)
V 1981); Smith v. Schweiker, 728 F.2d 1158, 1162 (8th Cir.1984); McMillian v. Schweiker, 697 F.2d 215, 221 (8th Cir.1983).
green
Bennie WISEMAN, Appellant, v. Louis W. SULLIVAN, M.D., Secretary of Health and Human Services, Appellee (1990)
We recognize that the AU must give serious consideration to a claimant’s subjective complaints of pain, see Smith v. Schweiker, 728 F.2d 1158, 1163 (8th Cir.1984), and should not discredit those complaints solely because of a lack of medical evidence supporting them.
green
Gavin v. Heckler (1987)
“Substantial evidence” is merely such “relevant evidence that a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.” Consolidated Edison Co. v. National Labor Relations Bd., 305 U.S. 197, 229 , 59 S.Ct. 206, 217 , 83 L.Ed. 126 (1938); Smith v. Schweiker, 728 F.2d 1158, 1162 (8th Cir.1984).
green
Gavin v. Heckler (1987)
"Substantial evidence" is merely such "relevant evidence that a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion." Consolidated Edison Co. v. National Labor Relations Bd., 305 U.S. 197, 229 , 59 S.Ct. 206, 217 , 83 L.Ed. 126 (1938); Smith v. Schweiker, 728 F.2d 1158, 1162 (8th Cir.1984).
green
Griffen COOK, Appellant, v. Margaret HECKLER, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Appellee (1984)
E.g., Reinhart v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 733 F.2d 571, at 572-573 (8th Cir.1984); Smith v. Schweiker, 728 F.2d 1158, 1163 (8th Cir.1984); Mallett v. Schweiker, 721 F.2d 256, 258 (8th Cir.1983); Nelson v. Heckler, 712 F.2d 346, 348 (8th Cir.1983); Simonson v. Schweiker, 699 F.2d 426, 429 (8th Cir.1983); Cole v. Harris, 641 F.2d *399 613, 615-616 (8th Cir.1981); Brand v. Secretary of Dep’t of Health, Education and Welfare, 623 F.2d 523, 525-27 (8th Cir. 1980).
green
Betty J. SHELTON, Appellant, v. Margaret HECKLER, Secretary of Health & Human Services, Appellee (1984)
Substantial evidence “is relevant evidence that a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.” Smith v. Schweiker, 728 F.2d 1158, 1162 (8th Cir. 1984).
green
Michael Edwin SMITH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Margaret M. HECKLER, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Def… (1984)
As Justice Frankfurter pointed out in Universal Camera Corp. v. NLRB, 340 U.S. 474, 488 , 71 S.Ct. 456, 464 , 95 L.Ed. 456 (1951), “[t]he substantiality of evidence must take into account whatever in the record fairly detracts from its weight.” See Smith v. Schweiker, 728 F.2d 1158, 1161 (8th Cir.1984) Brand, 623 F.2d at 527 .
green
Johnny LEDOUX, Appellant, v. Richard S. SCHWEIKER, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Appellee (1984)
Smith, supra, at 1162.
green
Funderburg v. Bowen (1987)
Smith v. Schweiker, 728 F.2d 1158, 1163 (8th Cir.1984).
green
Haukaas v. Saul (2021)
See Smith v. Schweiker, 728 F.2d 1158, 1163 (8th Cir. 1984) (“The ALJ may not disregard subjective evidence concerning pain merely because it was not fully corroborated by the objective evidence.”).
“The ALJ may not disregard subjective evidence concerning pain merely because it was not fully corroborated by the objective evidence.”
green
Nygaard v. Berryhill (2019)
“The ALJ may not disregard subjective evidence concerning pain merely because it was not fully corroborated by the objective evidence.” Smith v. Schweiker, 728 F.2d 1158, 1163 (8th Cir. 1984).
green
Nygaard v. Berryhill (2019)
“The ALJ may not disregard subjective evidence concerning pain merely because it was not fully corroborated by the objective evidence.” Smith v. Schweiker, 728 F.2d 1158, 1163 (8th Cir. 1984).
green
Dauer v. Berryhill (2018)
“The ALJ may not disregard subjective evidence concerning pain merely because it was not fully corroborated by the objective evidence.” Smith v. Schweiker, 728 F.2d 1158, 1163 (8th Cir. 1984).
green
Georgiou v. Apfel (1999)
Smith v. Schweiker, 728 F.2d 1158, 1161 (8th Cir.1984); Nettles v. Schweiker, 714 F.2d 833 (8th Cir.1983).
green
Davis v. Callahan (1997)
In Smith v. Schweiker, 728 F.2d 1158, 1163 (8th Cir.1984), Judge Bowman wrote: Because Smith established the inability to return to her former job as a meat packer, the ALJ should have shifted the burden of proof to the Secretary to come forward with evidence that Smith has the requisite residual functional capacity and vocational qualification to do other jobs which exist in the national economy.
green
Shepherd v. Callahan (1997)
“Substantial evidence” is merely such “relevant evidence that a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.” Consolidated Edison Co. v. National Labor Relations Bd., 305 U.S. 197, 229 , 59 S.Ct. 206, 217 , 83 L.Ed. 126 (1938); Smith v. Schweiker, 728 F.2d 1158, 1162 (8th Cir.1984).
green
Weiler v. Shalala (1996)
See Lisa v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 940 F.2d 40, 43-45 (2nd Cir.1991); Preston v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 854 F.2d 815 , 817- 18 (6th Cir.1988) (per curiam); Tsarelka v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 842 F.2d 529, 533 (1st Cir.1988); Smith v. Schweiker, 728 F.2d 1158, 1162 (8th Cir.1984); Laplante v. Shalala, 898 F.Supp. 30, 33 (D.Mass.1995); Bourassa v. Shalala, 844 F.Supp. 853, 855 (D.Mass.1994).
green
Thompson v. Bowen (1987)
Richardson v. Perales, 402 U.S. 389, 401 , 91 S.Ct. 1420, 1427 , 28 L.Ed.2d 842 (1971); Smith v. Schweiker, 728 F.2d 1158, 1162 (8th Cir.1984).
green
Mastroni v. Bowen (1986)
See Stephens v. Heckler, 766 F.2d 284, 288 (7th Cir.1985) (“When experience backed by observation is set against the ‘speculative statement’ ... of a consulting physician, substantial evidence lies on the side of the treating physician.”) (citation omitted); Smith v. Schweiker, 728 F.2d 1158, 1163-64 (8th Cir. 1984); Perez v. Schweiker, 653 F.2d 997, 1001 (5th Cir.1981); Gold v. Secretary of HEW, 463 F.2d 38, 42 (2d Cir.1972); Fulwood, 594 F.Supp. at 544 (“The ALJ is require…
green
Smith v. Bowen (1986)
Plaintiff urges that the AU’s summary dismissal of these complaints was error because an “AU may not disregard subjective evidence concerning pain merely because it was not fully corroborated by the objective *449 evidence.” Smith v. Sckweiker, 728 F.2d 1158, 1163 (8th Cir.1984) (citation omitted).
See Smith v. Schweiker, 728 F.2d 1158, 1162 (8th Cir. 1984).
green
Bradshaw v. Heckler (1987)
See, e.g., Smith v. Schweiker, 728 F.2d 1158, 1162 (8th Cir.1984).
green
Bradshaw v. Heckler (1987)
See, e.g., Smith v. Schweiker, 728 F.2d 1158, 1162 (8th Cir.1984).