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.
7 canonical passages across 7 cases, quoted by 68 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 Liza Strongson v. Jo Anne B. Barnhart, Commissioner of Social Security.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Liza Strongson v. Jo Anne B. Barnhart, Commissioner of Social Security Anchor | green | “need not explicitly discuss each polaski factor.” | 18 |
| 2 | Jana Turpin v. Carolyn W. Colvin | green | “if it is supported by substantial evidence, which does not require a preponderance of the evidence but only enough that a reasonable mind would find it adequate to support the decision, and the commissioner applied the correct legal standards.” | 13 |
| 3 | Walker v. Colvin | green | “while the extent of daily living activities does not alone show an ability to work, such activities may be considered along with other evidence when evaluating a claimant's credibility.” | 10 |
| 4 | Janet Chesser v. Nancy A. Berryhill | green | “good reasons for assigning lesser weight to the opinion of a treating source exist where the treating physician's opinions are themselves inconsistent, or where other medical assessments are supported by better or more thorough medical evidence.” | 8 |
| 5 | Geneva Northcutt v. Joseph Califano, Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare of the United States | green | “although evidence of pain suffered by a claimant may be of necessity subjective in nature, and therefore difficult to evaluate, the alj must give serious consideration to such evidence even though it is not fully corroborated by objective examinations and tests performed on the …” | 7 |
| 6 | Evelyn LAYTON, Appellant, v. Margaret HECKLER, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Appellee | green | “whether or not a medical explanation for the pain can be given, it is nevertheless possible that the claimant is suffering from disabling pain.” | 7 |
| 7 | John W. RAUTIO, Appellant, v. Otis R. BOWEN, Secretary of United States Department of Health and Human Services, Appellee | green | “the alj properly included only those limitations supported by the record as a whole in the hypothetical.” | 5 |
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.