Britton v. Astrue

How courts have described this case

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

• maintaining that VE’s “bottom line” must be “available on demand”
• suggesting various methods that a claimant may use to challenge a VE’s testimony
• suggesting various methods that a claimant may use to challenge a VE’s testimony
• “A finding based on unreliable [vocational expert] testimony is equivalent to a finding that is not supported by substantial evidence and must be vacated.”
• “A finding based on unreliable VE testimony is equivalent to a finding that is not supported by substantial evidence and must be vacated.”
• “a finding based on unreliable VE testimony is equivalent to a finding that is not supported by substantial evidence”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).