10 canonical passages across 5 cases, quoted by 197 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 Sharon Travis v. Michael J. Astrue, Commissioner, Social Security Administration.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Sharon Travis v. Michael J. Astrue, Commissioner, Social Security Administration Anchor | green | “if substantial evidence supports the commissioner's conclusions, this court does not reverse even if it would reach a different conclusion, or merely because substantial evidence also supports the contrary outcome.” | 29 |
| 2 | Sharon Travis v. Michael J. Astrue, Commissioner, Social Security Administration | green | “considers evidence that detracts from the commissioner's decision as well as evidence that supports it.” | 25 |
| 3 | Bertha Eichelberger v. Jo Anne B. Barnhart | green | “some medical evidence' must support the determination of the claimant's rfc, and the alj should obtain medical evidence that addresses the claimant's 'ability to function in the workplace.” | 24 |
| 4 | Wildman v. Astrue | green | “an alj's failure to cite specific evidence does not indicate that such evidence was not considered.” | 24 |
| 5 | Bertha Eichelberger v. Jo Anne B. Barnhart | green | “a disability claimant has the burden to establish her rfc.” | 21 |
| 6 | Jessie Nash v. Commissioner, Social Security | green | “if substantial evidence supports the commissioner's conclusions, this court does not reverse even if it would reach a different conclusion, or merely because substantial evidence also supports the contrary outcome.” | 17 |
| 7 | Jessie Nash v. Commissioner, Social Security | green | “less than a preponderance, but enough that a reasonable mind would find it adequate to support the commissioner's conclusions” | 16 |
| 8 | Sharon Travis v. Michael J. Astrue, Commissioner, Social Security Administration | green | “evidence that detracts from the commissioner's decision as well as evidence that supports it.” | 15 |
| 9 | Stephen Chismarich v. Nancy A. Berryhill | green | “substantial evidence is less than a preponderance, but enough that a reasonable mind would find it adequate to support the commissioner's conclusions.” | 13 |
| 10 | Jessie Nash v. Commissioner, Social Security | green | “substantial evidence is less than a preponderance, but enough that a reasonable mind would find it adequate to support the commissioner's conclusions.” | 13 |
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.