Eric A. Edelson v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “the ALJ has an affirmative obligation to identify any ‘apparent’ conflict [with the DOT] and to resolve it”
• observing that a court will not disturb an ALJ’s opinion that is supported by substantial evidence
• explaining that in addition to looking at the text of a regulation for the proper interpretation, courts “look to the stated purpose of the regulation”
• explaining that substantial evidence exists if “on this record it would have been possible for a reasonable jury to reach the [ALJ’s] conclusion” (quotation marks omitted)
• noting that an apparent conflict is one that apparent conflict is a “conflict that is reasonably ascertainable or evident from a review of the DOT and the VE's testimony”
• explaining that “[a]lthough the burden temporarily shifts at step five, “the overall burden of demonstrating the existence of a disability as defined by the Social Security Act unquestionably rests with the claimant.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).