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.
12 canonical passages across 9 cases, quoted by 2,333 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 Grogan v. Barnhart.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Grogan v. Barnhart Anchor | green | “meticulously examine the record as a whole, including anything that may undercut or detract from the alj's findings in order to determine if the substantiality test has been met.” | 444 |
| 2 | Danny CLIFTON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Shirley S. CHATER, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant-Appellee | green | “in addition to discussing the evidence supporting his decision, the alj also must discuss the uncontroverted evidence he chooses not to rely upon, as well as significantly probative evidence he rejects.” | 386 |
| 3 | Langley v. Barnhart | green | “substantial evidence is such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.” | 350 |
| 4 | Watkins v. Barnhart | green | “we will not reach the remaining issues raised by appellant because they may be affected by the alj's treatment of this case on remand.” | 261 |
| 5 | Bowen v. Yuckert | green | “to engage in any substantial gainful activity by reason of any medically determinable physical or mental impairment which can be expected to result in death or which has lasted or can be expected to last for a continuous period of not less than 12 months.” | 220 |
| 6 | Grogan v. Barnhart | green | “severe medically determinable . . . impairment . . . or a combination of impairments” | 194 |
| 7 | Hardman v. Barnhart | green | “pick and choose among medical reports, using portions of evidence favorable to his position while ignoring other evidence.” | 137 |
| 8 | Haga v. Barnhart | green | “this court may not create or adopt post-hoc rationalizations to support the alj's decision that are not apparent from the alj's decision itself.” | 103 |
| 9 | Fischer-Ross v. Barnhart | green | “burden of establishing a prima facie case of disability under steps one, two, and four” | 85 |
| 10 | Grogan v. Barnhart | green | “the burden of establishing a prima facie case of disability, . . . the burden of proof shifts to the commissioner at step five to show that” | 68 |
| 11 | William T. WINFREY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Shirley S. CHATER, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant-Appellee | green | “failure to apply the correct legal standards, or to show . . . that she has done so, are also grounds for reversal.” | 44 |
| 12 | Danny CLIFTON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Shirley S. CHATER, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant-Appellee | green | “the case must be remanded for the alj to set out her specific findings and her reasons for accepting or rejecting evidence.” | 41 |
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.