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 2 cases, quoted by 43 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 Daniel Minnick v. Carolyn Colvin.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Daniel Minnick v. Carolyn Colvin Anchor | green | “in considering whether a claimant's condition meets or equals a listed impairment, an alj must discuss the listing by name and offer more than perfunctory analysis of the listing.” | 27 |
| 2 | Schomas v. Colvin | green | “predict with great confidence that the result on remand would be the same.” | 10 |
| 3 | Schomas v. Colvin | green | “can predict with great confidence that the result on remand would be the same.” | 6 |
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.