Skip to main content
Fifth Circuit· 10/5/2000

Carey v. Apfel

Citations

  • 230 F.3d 131
  • 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 24907
  • 2000 WL 1481162

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that where the VE offers “clear and unchallenged testimony,” the ALJ’s determination is supported by substantial evidence
  • holding that claimants should not be permitted to scan the record for implied or unexplained conflicts when the conflict was not deemed sufficient to merit adversarial development in the administrative hearing
  • providing that a reviewing court may not reweigh the evidence or substitute its judgment for the ALJ’s judgment even if the evidence weighs against the ALJ’s determination
  • providing that a reviewing court may not reweigh the evidence or substitute its judgment for the ALJ’s judgment even if the evidence weighs against the ALJ’s determination
  • providing that a reviewing court may not reweigh the evidence or substitute its judgment for the ALJ’s judgment even if the evidence weighs against the ALJ’s determination
  • finding there was no conflict with the DOT because the DOT did not state that the job required two hands

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Garwood, Demoss, Parker

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

67 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

18 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named Carey v. Apfel

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.