Wildman v. Astrue’s Empirical Analysis
596 F.3d 959 · 2010
Citation profile
22 federal appellate · 7 district ·
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 401 (§ 201 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Polaski v. Heckler · Goff v. Barnhart · Robert J. Lauer v. Kenneth S. Apfel, Commissioner of Social Security · Wagner v. Astrue · Krogmeier v. Barnhart
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 70 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The claimant’s allegations are programmatically insufficient for evaluation prior to 3/07 when she initiated treatment. The claimant has not required psychiatric hospitalization. At psychiatric evaluation on 7/23/07, the claimant presented with logical thought processes. Concentration and memory were within normal limits. Most recent GAF is estimated at 50. The claimant cares for young children, prepares meals, cleans, and does laundry. She drives and shops for groceries, noting that she doesn’t like to be in the store for longer than 10 to 20 minutes. The claimant manages finances, does scrapbooking and interacts with family. The claimant appears to have a severe mental impairment that does not meet or equal a referenced listing. Based on ADLs the claimant is able to understand and remember instructions and procedures for basic and detailed tasks. Concentration is sufficient to carry out routine tasks. The claimant’s medical record and ADLs would indicate that she has the ability to interact on a time-limited, superficial basis with others. Treatment notes and ADLs suggest some moderate interruptions in her ability to regularly complete a typical work week. This assessment is consistent with the evidence of record. No treating source statement was offered.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“about the nature and severity of impairments; 3) the opinion must be well-supported by medically acceptable clinical and laboratory diagnostic techniques, i.e., there must be some reasonable support for the opinion; and, 4) the opinion must also be consistent with the other substantial evidence in the record. The ruling states that when all of the factors are satisfied,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Terry v. Berryhill“[N]oncomplianee can constitute evidence that is inconsistent with a treating physician’s medical opinion....”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Bernard v. Colvin
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.