Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
9 canonical passages across 8 cases, quoted by 305 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 Brooke Taskila v. Comm'r of Social Security.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Brooke Taskila v. Comm'r of Social Security Anchor | green | “six thousand jobs in the united states fits comfortably within what this court and others have deemed 'significant” | 108 |
| 2 | Clarence WALTERS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant-Appellee | green | “an alj's findings based on the credibility of the applicant are to be accorded great weight and deference, particularly since an alj is charged with the duty of observing a witness's demeanor and credibility.” | 78 |
| 3 | Shepard v. Commissioner of Social Security | green | “an rfc is an 'administrative finding,' and the final responsibility for determining an individual's rfc is reserved to the commissioner.” | 26 |
| 4 | Ahmed Nejat v. Commissioner of Social Securit | green | “consider the claimant's obesity, in combination with other impairments, at all stages of the sequential evaluation.” | 23 |
| 5 | Isaiah O'Banner v. Secretary of Health, Education & Welfare, and Willie L. Smith v. Caspar Weinberger, Secretary of Health, Education & Welfare | green | “a finding supported by substantial evidence that a claimant has the vocational qualifications to perform specific jobs” | 20 |
| 6 | Ivory O. Miller v. Secretary of Health and Human Services | green | “is based upon sufficient medical data.” | 19 |
| 7 | Steven Norris v. Commissioner of Social Security | green | “so long as the alj's decision adequately explains and justifies its determination as a whole, it satisfies the necessary requirements to survive this court's review.” | 18 |
| 8 | Randall Ritchie v. Commissioner of Social Security | green | “may not be disturbed absent compelling reason,” | 7 |
| 9 | Randall Ritchie v. Commissioner of Social Security | green | “credibility findings may not be disturbed absent compelling reason,” | 6 |
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.