Ebert v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that DOT defined job was not similar to plaintiff’s actual job because it was “considerably more [physically] strenuous”
• where the record contained evidence of physical conditions that could reasonably cause pain, it was a “complete misreading of the medical records ... to say that Plaintiffs complaints of pain or weakness ... are subjective and unverifiable.”
• where the record contained evidence of physical conditions which could reasonably cause pain, it was a “complete misreading of the medical records .... to say that Plaintiffs complaints of pain or weakness ... are subjective and unverifiable”
• where the record contained evidence of physical conditions which could reasonably cause pain, it was a “complete misreading of the medical records ... to say that Plaintiffs complaints of pain or weakness ... are subjective and unverifiable”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).