20 C.F.R. § 416.917
Consultative examination at our expense
If your medical sources cannot or will not give us sufficient medical evidence about your impairment for us to determine whether you are disabled or blind, we may ask you to have one or more physical or mental examinations or tests. We will pay for these examinations. However, we will not pay for any medical examination arranged by you or your representative without our advance approval. If we arrange for the examination or test, we will give you reasonable notice of the date, time, and place the examination or test will be given, and the name of the person or facility who will do it. We will also give the examiner any necessary background information about your condition.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 204
cases (120 in the last 5 years), 1981–2026 · leading case: Ersa LANDSAW v. Sec'y OF HEALTH & HUMAN Servs., 803 F.2d 211 (6th Cir. 1986).
Ersa LANDSAW v. Sec'y OF HEALTH & HUMAN Servs., 803 F.2d 211 (6th Cir. 1986). “20 C.F.R. § 416.917 (a). As to the AU’s duty to conduct a “full inquiry,” 20 C.”
Joseph MOON v. Louis W. SULLIVAN, 923 F.2d 1175 (6th Cir. 1990). “1986) (citing 20 C.F.R. § 416.917 (a)). Similarly, the claimant’s reliance on Wallace v.”
Betty Holladay v. Otis Bowen, 848 F.2d 1206 (11th Cir. 1988). “20 C.F.R. § 416.917 (a). Yet because of the Secretary’s duty to develop the medical record fully and fairly, this court has held that “[i]t is reversible error for an AU not to order a consultative examination when such an evaluation is necessary for him to make an informed…”
Garland Lott, Jr. v. Carolyn W. Colvin, 772 F.3d 546 (8th Cir. 2014). “1986) (per curiam); see also 20 C.F.R. § 416.917 (explaining an ALJ may order additional testing if necessary to determine if the claimant is disabled).”
Betty J. MATTHEWS v. Otis R. BOWEN, 879 F.2d 422 (8th Cir. 1989). “The regulations, however, do not require the Secretary or the AU to order a consultative evaluation of every alleged impairment.”
Settles v. Colvin, 121 F. Supp. 3d 163 (D.D.C. 2015). “; see also 20 C.F.R. § 416.917 . As previously stated, Dr.”
Johnny E. Boyd v. Louis W. Sullivan, 960 F.2d 733 (8th Cir. 1992). “20 C.F.R. § 416.917 . Moreover, “[i]t is reversible error for an AU not to order a consultative examination when such an evaluation is necessary for him to make an informed decision.”
Jean Dozier v. Margaret M. Heckler, 754 F.2d 274 (8th Cir. 1985). “20 C.F.R. § 416.917 . 1 In this case, appellant argues, and we agree, that the AU erred by failing to order consultative examinations.”
Borgens ex rel. Borgens v. Halter, 164 F. Supp. 2d 1309 (M.D. Fla. 2001). “20 C.F.R. § 416.917 ; see also *1320 Conley v.”
Smith v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 564 F. App'x 758 (6th Cir. 2014). “See 20 C.F.R. § 416.917 ("If your medical sources cannot or will not give us sufficient medical evidence about your impairment for us to determine whether you are disabled or blind, we may ask you to have one or more physical or mental examinations or tests.”
Annie Lois Smith v. Otis R. Bowen, 792 F.2d 1547 (11th Cir. 1986). “” 20 C.F.R. § 416.917 . This court has remanded cases to the AU for the express purpose of obtaining a psychiatric examination.”
Tabitha S. Griffith v. John J. Callahan, 138 F.3d 1150 (7th Cir. 1998). “See 20 C.F.R. § 416.917 (stating that an ALJ may order a consultative medical examination “[i]f [the claimant’s] medical sources cannot or will not give [the ALJ] sufficient medical evidence about [the claimant’s] impairment for [the ALJ] to determine whether [the claimant] is…”
20 C.F.R. § 416.917(b): 1 case
Monaghan v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., No. 1:19-cv-00895 (S.D. Miss. Oct. 5, 2020).
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.