5 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 229 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side — they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Schaaf v. Astrue.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Schaaf v. Astrue Anchor | green | “such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.” | 102 |
| 2 | Jelinek v. Astrue | green | “if the alj applied the correct legal standards and supported his decision with substantial evidence.” | 52 |
| 3 | Janice S. ESTOK, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Kenneth S. APFEL, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant-Appellee | green | “does not substitute its judgment for that of the commissioner by reconsidering facts, reweighing evidence, resolving conflicts in evidence, or deciding questions of credibility.” | 52 |
| 4 | Jelinek v. Astrue | green | “if the alj applied the correct legal standards and supported her decision with substantial evidence.” | 14 |
| 5 | Jelinek v. Astrue | green | “will uphold the commissioner's decision if the alj applied the correct legal standards and supported his decision with substantial evidence.” | 9 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment — for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.