Ealy v. 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.

• holding that, unlike here, an ALJ was required to include a limitation in the hypothetical after adopting a doctor’s opinion that it was necessary
• holding that the Act’s requirement for an ALJ to give good reasons for rejecting a treating physician’s opinions does not apply to an examining physician
• concluding that similar moderate limitations were not conveyed adequately through a limitation to unskilled work
• holding that the Act’s requirement for an ALJ to give good reasons for rejecting a treating physician’s opinions does not apply to an examining physician
• holding that remand was warranted because the ALJ's hypothetical to the VE did not accurately convey the speed-and-pace limitations in the physician’s opinion that the ALJ had credited
• holding that ALJ did not err in rejecting examining source’s opinion as to claimant’s mental function where, among other things, ALJ pointed out that claimant’s daily activities did not support examining source’s findings

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).