Ferguson 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 ALJ properly rejected treating psychiatrist’s opinion where it consisted “mostly of the claimant’s history and complaints” and the doctor had not “conducted any testing or prepared any report or letter explaining any objective medical bases for her opinion”
• finding that the ALJ did not err in rejecting a medical opinion premised upon claimant’s subjective complaints that were not supported by objective medical evidence
• admitting that the medical records were only partially legible, consisting of phrases and not full sentences, but when viewing the entire record, the court determined this was sufficient to uphold the district court’s conclusion
• upholding the Appeals Council’s and district court’s findings 26 that the new evidence was not material because it was “cumulative” when the new evidence “confirm[ed] the pre-existing evidence”
• noting that cumulative evidence is not material
• to be “material” there must be a “reasonable probability” the Commissioner would have reached a different disposition

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).