Daniels Ex Rel. Daniels v. Apfel

How courts have described this case

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

• VE’s own observation and job analyses performed 2-3 years before hearing did not constitute reasonable explanation of conflict with DOT
• “In explaining its reasons for denying Mr. Daniels’ request for review of the ALJ’s decision, the Appeals Council discussed with great specificity other new evidence concerning the deterioration of Mr. Daniels’ health after the ALJ issued his December 29, 1997 decision.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).