A. Adler & Co. v. Cannon

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• rejecting ALJ’s evaluation affording “little” weight to treating physician’s “check- box” opinion, where the opinion was fully supported by narrative explanations and accompanied by a page-and-a-half attachment of typewritten notes expounding on the form answers
• “While the form Dr. Ahmed used did contain some check- boxes, the opinion was fully supported by narrative explanations . . . .”
• “Remand for the purpose of calculation of benefits is warranted where the record demonstrates the claimant’s disability, and where there is no reason to conclude that there is additional evidence to support the Commissioner’s claim that a claimant is not disabled.”
• “Remand for the purpose of calculation of benefits is warranted where the record demonstrates the claimant’s disability, and where there is no reason to conclude that there is additional evidence to support the Commissioner’s claim that a claimant is not disabled.”
• “Remand for the purpose of calculation of benefits is warranted where the record demonstrates the claimant’s disability, and where there is no reason to conclude that there is additional evidence to support the Commissioner’s claim that a claimant is not disabled.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).