Cornelius Washington v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that medical opinions based on treatment occurring after the date of the ALJ's decision may be chronologically relevant when, in part, a doctor reviewed the claimant's treatment records from that period when forming the opinion
• concluding that a medical examination that takes place after the ALJ’s decision may be chronologically relevant if it relates back to the date of the ALJ’s decision
• concluding that inconsistency between one examining physician’s opinion and the new examining physician’s opinion supported materiality because the ALJ could credit the new opinion over the one he already considered
• holding that physician’s opinion was chronologically relevant, even though it was based on an examination performed after the ALJ’s decision, because the opinion was based, in part, on the claimant’s medical records before the decision
• recognizing that medical opinions based on treatment occurring after the date of the ALJ’s decision may be chronologically relevant when, in part, a doctor reviewed the claimant’s treatment records from that period when forming his opinion
• stating that the Appeals Council is required to consider evidence that is both material and chronologically relevant

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).