Daniel Hall v. Carolyn Colvin

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that an ALJ erred in her “belief that complaints of pain, to be credible, must be confirmed by diagnostic tests.”
• noting that “for such soft-tissue injuries an MRI is a better 5 diagnostic tool than an x-ray.”
• noting that the ALJ’s failure to properly weigh the VA’s disability determination that claimant was seventy percent disabled, and thus totally unemployable and entitled to full benefits, required remand
• explaining that x-rays are particularly limited as indicators of pain
• finding the different criteria for determining disability to be “very small”
• “an administrative law judge may not deny benefits on the sole ground that there is no diagnostic evidence of pain”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).