6 canonical passages across 6 cases, quoted by 182 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 William HUNTER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Louis W. SULLIVAN, Etc., Defendant-Appellee.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | William HUNTER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Louis W. SULLIVAN, Etc., Defendant-Appellee Anchor | green | “if the alj finds that a claimant has not satisfied any step of the process, review does not proceed to the next step.” | 107 |
| 2 | Mary Ruth Smith v. Shirley S. Chater, Commissioner of Social Security | green | “the duty to resolve conflicts in the evidence rests with the alj, not with a reviewing court.” | 51 |
| 3 | Shaibi v. Berryhill | green | “t least when claimants are represented by counsel, they must raise all issues and evidence at their administrative hearings in order to preserve them on appeal.” | 8 |
| 4 | Angela Farrell v. Michael Astrue | green | “evidence that has been rejected by the appeals council cannot be considered to reevaluate the alj's factual findings.” | 6 |
| 5 | Willie Hicks v. Joseph A. Califano, Jr., Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare | green | “we do not think that the approximately 110 jobs testified to by the constitute an insignificant number.” | 5 |
| 6 | Jackie L. HAYS, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Louis W. SULLIVAN, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant-Appellee | green | “ultimately, it is the duty of the reviewing a case, and not the responsibility of the courts, to make findings of fact and to resolve conflicts in the evidence.” | 5 |
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.