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.
5 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 701 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 Ellen Melville v. Kenneth S. Apfel, Commissioner of Social Security.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ellen Melville v. Kenneth S. Apfel, Commissioner of Social Security Anchor | green | “it is not the function of a reviewing court to decide de novo whether a claimant was disabled.” | 216 |
| 2 | Edwind F. PRATTS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Shirley S. CHATER, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant-Appellee | green | “when there are gaps in the administrative record or the alj has applied an improper legal standard,” | 166 |
| 3 | Lamay v. Commissioner of Social SEC. | green | “means such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.” | 152 |
| 4 | Poupore v. Astrue | green | “determining whether there is substantial evidence supporting the commissioner's decision and whether the commissioner applied the correct legal standard.” | 140 |
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.