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 218 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 Tara Crump v. Andrew M. Saul.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Tara Crump v. Andrew M. Saul Anchor | green | “observing that a person can perform simple and repetitive tasks says nothing about whether the individual can do so on a sustained basis, including, for example, over the course of a standard eight-hour work shift.” | 98 |
| 2 | O'Connor-Spinner v. Astrue | green | “manifest that the alj's alternative phrasing specifically excluded those tasks that someone with the claimant's limitations would be unable to perform.” | 60 |
| 3 | Debara DeCamp v. Nancy Berryhill | green | “there is no basis to suggest that eliminating jobs with strict production quotas or a fast pace may serve as a proxy for including a moderate limitation on concentration, persistence, and pace.” | 60 |
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.