Craft v. Astrue

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that ALJs may not simply limit claimants to simple, unskilled work as a means of addressing mental impairments
• holding that a limitation to unskilled work did not account for several effects of mental impairment
• concluding that ALJs “must not draw any inferences” from noncompliance without “explor[ing] the claimant’s explanations as to the lack of medical care.”
• holding that ALJ erred in “ignor[ing] Craft’s qualifications as to how he carried out” his activities
• holding that “failure to follow a treatment plan can support an adverse credibility finding where the claimant does not have a good reason for the failure”
• holding that ALJ must not draw inferences about plaintiff’s condition from plaintiff’s infrequent treatment or failure to follow treatment plan unless ALJ has explored plaintiff’s explanations as to lack of medical care

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).