Garland Lott, Jr. v. Carolyn W. Colvin

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 decision marked by “internal inconsistencies” was not supported by substantial evidence
• reversing ALJ decision where record did not contain “essential” test for determining whether claimant met listed impairment
• remanding to resolve inconsistencies in the ALJ’s opinion and medical opinion evidence where the record did not contain an IQ score, but the ALJ found Plaintiff suffered from the “severe impairment of mild mental retardation”
• discussing special education classes, failure to complete high school, and violent altercations
• mere diagnosis of condition named in listing does not qualify claimant for presumptive disability
• ALJs could nearly always point to performance of rudimentary activities of daily living, thus making it practically impossible for non-institutionalized mentally retarded claimants to show significantly sub-average general intellectual functioning with deficits in adaptive functioning

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).