§Why CasetextPricing

Burleson v. Berryhill

MOTION for Summary Judgment - Social Security

24 Cited authorities

  1. Bowen v. Yuckert

    482 U.S. 137 (1987)   Cited 24,386 times
    Holding that "disability claimants" are responsible for making "a threshold showing that their 'medically determinable' impairments are severe enough to satisfy the regulatory standards"

  2. Richardson v. Perales

    402 U.S. 389 (1971)   Cited 55,760 times
    Holding that, when "presented with the not uncommon situation of conflicting medical evidence . . . [t]he trier of fact has the duty to resolve that conflict"

  3. Mascio v. Colvin

    780 F.3d 632 (4th Cir. 2015)   Cited 3,950 times
    Holding that this boilerplate language conflicts with the regulations and rulings

  4. Johnson v. Barnhart

    434 F.3d 650 (4th Cir. 2005)   Cited 4,853 times
    Holding that the Law Judge logically reasoned that the ability to engage in certain activities was inconsistent with the plaintiff's allegations of disabling pain and physical limitations

  5. Florida Power Light Co. v. Lorion

    470 U.S. 729 (1985)   Cited 1,888 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Hobbs Act vests in the court of appeals initial judicial review authority over an NRC order denying a petition under 10 C.F.R. § 2.206 for suspension of an operating license

  6. Hancock v. Astrue

    667 F.3d 470 (4th Cir. 2012)   Cited 2,579 times
    Holding that ALJ has the discretion to assess the validity of an IQ test result and is not required to accept it even if it is the only test in the record

  7. Radford v. Colvin

    734 F.3d 288 (4th Cir. 2013)   Cited 2,290 times
    Holding that the ALJ cannot "summarily conclude" that a listing is not satisfied when there is at least conflicting evidence in the record

  8. Hays v. Sullivan

    907 F.2d 1453 (4th Cir. 1990)   Cited 6,418 times
    Holding that it is the ALJ's responsibility, not the court's, to determine the weight of evidence and resolve conflicts of evidence

  9. Mastro v. Apfel

    270 F.3d 171 (4th Cir. 2001)   Cited 3,710 times
    Holding that the court is not to "undertake to reweigh conflicting evidence, make credibility determinations, or substitute [its] judgment for that of" the agency

  10. Hines v. Barnhart

    453 F.3d 559 (4th Cir. 2006)   Cited 2,349 times
    Holding that ALJ applied an "improper standard to disregard the treating physician's opinion that [claimant] was fully disabled"

  11. Section 405 - Evidence, procedure, and certification for payments

    42 U.S.C. § 405   Cited 157,203 times   34 Legal Analyses
    Ruling out jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1346

  12. Section 404.1520 - Evaluation of disability in general

    20 C.F.R. § 404.1520   Cited 87,380 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Determining disability under Title II of the Act

  13. Section 404.1527 - Evaluating opinion evidence for claims filed before March 27, 2017

    20 C.F.R. § 404.1527   Cited 48,104 times
    Holding that "[t]he ALJ improperly reduced the two-step evaluation procedure mandated by the Regulations into solely consideration of the remaining factors in the Regulations, such as 'supportability' and 'consistency' factors"

  14. Section 404.1545 - Your residual functional capacity

    20 C.F.R. § 404.1545   Cited 30,103 times
    Holding that "the ALJ . . . is responsible for assessing your residual functional capacity"

  15. Section 404.1563 - Your age as a vocational factor

    20 C.F.R. § 404.1563   Cited 9,724 times
    Defining persons "closely approaching advanced age" as between ages fifty and fifty-four

  16. Section 404.1520a - Evaluation of mental impairments

    20 C.F.R. § 404.1520a   Cited 6,688 times
    Describing administrative process for evaluating degree of functional limitations and severity of mental impairments and providing that the ALJ's written decision must include these determinations