Rabbers v. Commissioner Social Security Administration’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 federal appellate · 2 district ·

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 104 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[A] decision of the Commissioner will not be upheld where the [Social Security Administration] fails to follow its own regulations and where that error prejudices a claimant on the merits or deprives the claimant of a substantial right.”

   11 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. McGeorge v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. · Powers v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.

2. “1) If the claimant is doing substantial gainful activity, the claimant is not disabled. 2) If the claimant does not have a severe medically determinable physical or mental impairment-i.e., an impairment that significantly limits his or her physical or mental ability to do basic work aetivities-the claimant is not disabled. 3) If the claimant has a severe impairments) that meets or equals one of the listings in Appendix 1 to Subpart P of the regulations and meets the duration requirement, the claimant is disabled. 4) If the claimant’s impairment does not prevent him or her from doing his or her past relevant work, the claimant is not disabled. 5) If the claimant can make an adjustment to other work, the claimant is not disabled.”

   6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Sorrell v. Commissioner of Social Security · Abdullah Amir v. Comm. of Social Security

3. “If an ALJ rejects a treating physician’s opinion but gives no reasons for doing so, it is difficult for a reviewing court to conduct its own analysis and make a judgment as to what the ALJ’s reasons would have been — unless ... the treating physician’s opinion is “so patently deficient that the Commissioner could not possibly credit it.” Faced with an ALJ’s failure to address the B criteria, however, a reviewing court need only ask whether the record indicates that the claimant’s mental impairment would have ultimately satisfied the B criteria. This kind of evidence — evidence regarding the claimant’s activities of daily living, social functioning, concentration, persistence, or pace, and episodes of decompensation — is objective, concrete factual and medical evidence that will be apparent in the record, at least in some cases.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 861 F. Supp. 2d 846 - M.G. v. Commissioner of Social Security