5 canonical passages across 5 cases, quoted by 232 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 | “n 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” | 109 |
| 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 . . . ather, 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” | 108 |
| 3 | Coleman v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. | green | “laintiff challenges only those portions of his rfc relating to his mental limitations . . . ccordingly, this ecision and rder addresses the rfc only as it pertains to laintiff's mental limitations” | 9 |
| 4 | Spielberg v. Barnhart | green | “factors are also to be considered with regard to non-treating sources, state agency consultants, and medical experts” | 3 |
| 5 | Ellis v. Colvin | green | “t was plainly improper for the alj to bolster his own rfc assessment with a blatant misstatement of the record” | 3 |
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.