Angela Myers v. Carolyn W. Colvin

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the Paragraph C Criteria may be satisfied by evidence of an ongoing “inability to function outside a highly supported living arrangement” that “greatly reduce[s] the mental demands placed on the claimant” (quotations omitted)
• stating that “[a] treating source’s opinion is not ‘inherently entitled’ to controlling weight” (quoting Hacker v. Barnhart, 459 F.3d 934, 937 (8th Cir. 2006))
• noting that recommendations for increased exercise and an absence of physician-imposed restrictions may be inconsistent with claims of disability
• noting that GAF scores may be considered in reviewing consistency between treating source opinion and the treatment record
• explaining that the RFC determination is based on all relevant evidence, including medical records, observations of treating physicians and others, and the claimant’s own description of her limitations
• finding that responsiveness to some treatments and noncompliance with other treatments, along with the claimant’s past relevant work history was sufficient to support the physical component of the RFC

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).