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 5 cases, quoted by 815 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 William E. Butts v. Jo Anne B. Barnhart, Commissioner of Social Security.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | William E. Butts v. Jo Anne B. Barnhart, Commissioner of Social Security Anchor | green | “in reviewing a final decision of the commissioner, a district court must determine whether the correct legal standards were applied and whether substantial evidence supports the decision” | 274 |
| 2 | Rita Schaal v. Kenneth S. Apfel, Commissioner of Social Security, 1 Dockets 96-6212, 96-6316 | green | “it is not our function to determine de novo whether plaintiff is disabled; . . . rather, we must determine whether the commissioner's conclusions are supported by substantial evidence in the record as a whole or are based on an erroneous legal standard” | 176 |
| 3 | William E. Butts v. Jo Anne B. Barnhart, Commissioner of Social Security | green | “the claimant bears the burden of proving his or her case at steps one through four; . . . at step five the burden shifts to the commissioner to 'show there is other gainful work in the national economy which the claimant could perform.” | 138 |
| 4 | Matejka v. Barnhart | green | “even where substantial evidence may support the claimant's position and despite the fact that the court, had it heard the evidence de novo, might have found otherwise.” | 110 |
| 5 | Pardee v. Astrue | green | “a claimant's physical abilities, mental abilities, symptomology, including pain and other limitations which could interfere with work activities on a regular and continuing basis.” | 96 |
| 6 | Spielberg v. Barnhart | green | “all medical opinions received regarding the claimant.” | 21 |
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.