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.
3 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 144 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 Robert E. Schmidt v. Jo Anne B. Barnhart, Commissioner of Social Security.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Robert E. Schmidt v. Jo Anne B. Barnhart, Commissioner of Social Security Anchor | green | “challenges to the sufficiency of the evidence rarely succeed.” | 56 |
| 2 | Terry v. Astrue | green | “although an alj need not discuss every piece of evidence in the record, the alj may not ignore an entire line of evidence that is contrary to the ruling.” | 49 |
| 3 | Sanders v. Colvin | green | “the substantial-evidence standard, however, asks whether the administrative decision is rationally supported, not whether it is correct (in the sense that federal judges would have reached the same conclusions on the same record).” | 39 |
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.