20 C.F.R. § 404.1519
The consultative examination
A consultative examination is a physical or mental examination or test purchased for you at our request and expense from a treating source or another medical source, including a pediatrician when appropriate. The decision to purchase a consultative examination will be made on an individual case basis in accordance with the provisions of §§ 404.1519a through 404.1519f. Selection of the source for the examination will be consistent with the provisions of § 404.1503a and §§ 404.1519g through 404.1519j. The rules and procedures for requesting consultative examinations set forth in §§ 404.1519a and 404.1519b are applicable at the reconsideration and hearing levels of review, as well as the initial level of determination.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 134
cases (47 in the last 5 years), 1964–2026 · leading case: Kacee Chandler v. Commissioner Social Security
Kacee Chandler v. Commissioner Social Security (2011)
“Although reliance on State consultants’ and treating physicians’ opinions is common and ALJs are required to consider any existing State consultant reports, see 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1519 , 404.1527(f), the regulations do not require ALJs to seek outside expert assistance, see 20 C.”
Cheryl Beardsley v. Carolyn Colvin (2014)
“See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1519 , 416.919 (establishing such consultative examinations for applicants seeking, respectively, disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income).”
Cummings v. Colvin (2015)
“2011) (citing 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1519 , 404.1527(e), 404.”
Nadine Reed v. Larry G. Massanari, Acting Commissioner of Social Security (2001)
“” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1519 , 416.919. Although referrals to consultative examiners may be made by the Social Security Administration (SSA), “[d]ay-to-day responsibility” for the consultative examination process rests not with the SSA but with cooperating State agencies.”
Charles PURTER, Appellant, v. Margaret HECKLER, Secretary Dept. of Health and Human Services (1985)
“1506 (d) (1976) with 20 C.F.R. § 404.1519 (c)(2) (1967) (amended by 40 Fed.”
Ray v. Astrue (2009)
“” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1519 , 416.919. As part of the CE, the ALJ can also order diagnostic tests and procedures, unless they pose a risk to the claimant.”
Dykes Ex Rel. Brymer v. Barnhart (2004)
“…*465 pense from a treating source or another medical source....” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1519 . 3 . The federal social security regulations provide that disability claims are evaluated through a five-step a”
Bruce B. Adams v. Caspar Weinberger, Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare (1977)
“Former 20 C.F.R. § 404.1519 (c)(2)(iii). See Marion v.”
Esther Marion, Guardian of James E. Marion, Incompetent v. John W. Gardner, Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare (1966)
“This is 20 C.F.R. § 404.1519 (c) (2) (iii), 42 U.”
Hernandez v. Astrue (2011)
“1517 ; see also 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1519 ; 404.1519g. Under the regulations, the medical opinion of a treating physician or psychiatrist will be given “controlling” weight if that opinion “is well-supported by medically acceptable clinical and laboratory diagnostic techniques and…”
Thomas P. Osborne v. Wilbur Cohen, Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare (1969)
“” [ 20 CFR § 404.1519 .] We are of the opinion that there was substantial evidence supporting the Secretary’s finding that the appellant was capable of engaging in substantial gainful work.”
Richards v. Colvin (2016)
“20 C.F.R. Section 404.1519(a)(b)(4) (2007); See also Robac-zewski v.”
— 20 C.F.R. § 404.1519(a)(1) — 1 case
Perkins v. Apfel (2000)
— 20 C.F.R. § 404.1519(a)(b)(4) — 1 case
Richards v. Colvin (2016)
“20 C.F.R. Section 404.1519(a)(b)(4) (2007); See also Robac-zewski v.”
— 20 C.F.R. § 404.1519(c) — 4 cases
Underwood v. Gardner (1967)
Jarrett v. Celebrezze (1964)
Cooney v. Finch (1969)
Branham v. Celebrezze (1965)
— 20 C.F.R. § 404.1519(g) — 1 case
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.