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.
6 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 127 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 Stephen R. VENTURA v. Donna E. SHALALA, Secretary of Health and Human Services. Stephen Ventura, Appellant.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Stephen R. VENTURA v. Donna E. SHALALA, Secretary of Health and Human Services. Stephen Ventura, Appellant Anchor | green | “such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate.” | 45 |
| 2 | Stephen R. VENTURA v. Donna E. SHALALA, Secretary of Health and Human Services. Stephen Ventura, Appellant | green | “such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate” | 31 |
| 3 | Thomas Williams v. Louis W. Sullivan, M.D., Secretary of Health and Human Services | green | “weighing the evidence or substituting its conclusions for those of the fact-finder.” | 20 |
| 4 | Holley v. Colvin | green | “(1) the objective medical facts; (2) the diagnoses and expert opinions of treating and examining physicians on subsidiary questions of fact; (3) subjective evidence of pain testified to by the plaintiff and corroborated by family and neighbors; and (4) the plaintiff's educationa…” | 14 |
| 5 | Holley v. Colvin | green | “(1) the objective medical facts; (2) the diagnoses of expert opinions of treating and examining physicians on subsidiary questions of fact; (3) subjective evidence of pain testified to by the plaintiff and corroborated by family and neighbors; and (4) the plaintiff's educational…” | 10 |
| 6 | Jessie Holloman v. Commissioner Social Security | green | “could have affected the outcome of her disability claim.” | 7 |
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.