Alfred PERKINS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Shirley S. CHATER, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant-Appellee

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “review of the question whether the [Appeals] Council made an error of law in applying this regulation is de novo”
• holding that evidence not technically in existence at the time of the administrative proceedings will not be considered “new” when it was Page 16 of 26 effectively available to the claimant at that time
• stating that evidence is “new” if it was not in existence or available to the claimant at the time of the administrative proceeding
• explaining that the Council’s letter “devotes a paragraph” to the new evidence
• finding rebuttal report not “new” because the conclusions therein were “derivative evidence” based “entirely on evidence that had long been available”
• denying request for plenary review where the Appeals Council expressly evaluated the additional evidence submitted by the claimant

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).