Billie HINCHEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Donna SHALALA, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant-Appellee

How courts have described this case

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

• when hypothetical question does not -6- encompass all relevant impairments, VE's testimony does not constitute substantial evidence to support the ALJ's decision
• “To be material, new evidence must be non-cumulative, relevant, and probative of the claimant's condition for the time period for which the benefits were denied, and there must be a reasonable likelihood that it would have changed the Secretary’s determination.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).