Barbara Castile v. Michael Astrue

How courts have described this case

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

• holding substantial evidence is “such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion”
• stating that when reviewing an ALJ’s credibility determination, the Court will “give the opinion a commonsensical reading rather than nitpicking at it.”
• noting that an appellant who fails to address the district court’s analysis of the ALJ’s decision engages in a “ ‘risky tactic,’ especially ... where the district court [ ] issued a ‘thorough and persuasive opinion’”
• explaining that the claimant “bears the burden of proving that she is disabled” and must present medical evidence linking her medical impairment to a functional limitation
• explaining that the claimant “bears the burden of proving that she is disabled” and must present medical evidence linking her medical impairment to a functional limitation
• affirming the ALJ’s decision where findings were “because of and not in spite of [the claimant’s] testimony”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).