Claussen v. Chater’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Reasonable minds can reach different conclusions following review of the evidentiary record upon which the Commissioner’s decision is based. Nevertheless, in such cases, a district court’s function is to determine whether the record, as a whole, contains substantial evidence to support the Commissioner’s findings. See Adorno v. Shalala, 40 F.3d 43, 46 (3d Cir.1994) (citing Richardson, 402 U.S. at 401 , 91 S.Ct. at 1427 ). A court may not displace an administrative body’s “ ‘choice between two fairly conflicting views, even though the court would justifiably have made a different choice had the matter been before it de novo.’ ” (citations omitted) Nonetheless, an ALJ is expected to do more than simply state factual conclusions. See Stewart, 714 F.2d at 290 . Rather, the ALJ must make specific findings of fact to support his or her ultimate findings. Id. The AU must consider all medical evidence in the record and provide adequate explanations for disregarding or rejecting evidence, especially when testimony of the claimant’s treating physician is rejected. See Wier on Behalf of Wier v. Heckler, 734 F.2d 955, 961 (3d Cir.1984); Cotter v. Harris, 642 F.2d 700, 705 (3d Cir.1981). He or she must also give serious consideration to the claimant’s subjective complaints- of pain, even when those assertions are not confirmed fully by objective medical evidence. See Mason v. Shalala, 994 F.2d 1058, 1067-68 (3d Cir.1993); Welch v. Heckler, 808 F.2d 264, 270 (3d Cir.1986). An ALJ, however,”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Akers v. Callahan

2. “The final determination of the Commissioner of Social Security after a hearing under paragraph (1) shall be subject to judicial review as provided in section 405(g) of this title to the same extent as the Commissioner’s final determinations under section 405 of this title.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Akers v. Callahan

3. “Any individual, after any final decision of the [Commissioner] made after a hearing to which he was a party, irrespective of the amount in controversy, may obtain a review of such decision by a civil action____”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Akers v. Callahan