Skip to main content
Ninth Circuit· 10/26/2012

Debbra Hill v. Michael Astrue

Citations

  • 698 F.3d 1153
  • 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 22245
  • 2012 WL 5278388

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that a non-treating, non-examining medical consultant’s opinion that failed to consider more recent evidence and was inconsistent with the record did not provide substantial evidence to support the ALJ’s decision
  • concluding the ALJ erred by failing to consider an examining psychologist’s opinion that the claimant’s impairment “makes the likelihood of sustained full time competitive employment unlikely”
  • “the 9 ALJ’s disregard for Dr. Johnson’s medical opinion was not harmless error and Dr. 10 Johnson’s opinion should have been considered”
  • “[The plaintiff’s] ‘combination of mental and medical problems makes the likelihood of sustained full time competitive employment unlikely.’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Goodwin, Pregerson, Smith

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

34 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

21 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named Debbra Hill v. Michael Astrue

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.