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.
4 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 19 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 Betty J. McAULAY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Margaret M. HECKLER, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant-Appellee.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Betty J. McAULAY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Margaret M. HECKLER, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant-Appellee Anchor | green | “this court has held that a comparison of the original medical evidence and the new medical evidence is necessary to make a finding of improvement.” | 9 |
| 2 | Willie M. FREEMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Margaret M. HECKLER, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant-Appellee | green | “treating the case as though it were an original application for benefits.” | 4 |
| 3 | Willie M. FREEMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Margaret M. HECKLER, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant-Appellee | green | “specifically referring to the original medical evidence.” | 3 |
| 4 | Frederic J. Gombash, III v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration | green | “to terminate benefits, the commissioner may not focus only on new evidence concerning disability, but must also evaluate the evidence upon which the claimant was originally found to be disabled.” | 3 |
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.