Curtis D. Gudgel v. Jo Anne B. Barnhart, Commissioner of Social Security

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that the contrary opinion of a nonexamining physician, by itself, does not constitute substantial evidence to reject a treating or examining physician’s opinion
• noting that the opinion of a non-examining state agency medical consultant does not by itself suffice as substantial evidence to reject the opinion of an examining physician
• applying the old regulations, the ALJ erred in rejecting treating physician’s diagnosis of post-polio syndrome without pointing to contradictory evidence
• finding error where “the ALJ did not explain how the evidence in the record contradicts [the examining physician]’s diagnosis”
• emphasizing importance of a doctor’s “opportunity to physically examine” a claimant
• an ALJ can reject an examining physician’s opinion only for reasons supported by substantial evidence in the record

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).