Jesse Senne v. Kenneth S. Apfel, 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.

• reversing and remanding where court was “unable to ascertain on this particular record whether the ALJ’s denial of Mr. Senne’s claim un der Listing 1.13 was supported by substantial evidence”
• rejecting claimant's argument that the conclusory form of the ALJ's decision alone justified remand, but remanding nonetheless because the court could not conclude the ALJ's step three finding was supported by substantial evidence
• rejecting the argument that deficiency in opinion writing alone warrants remand, but finding remand was required because the ALJ’s findings were not sufficient to ascertain whether the ALJ’s decision was supported by substantial evidence on the record
• rejecting the argument that deficiency in the ALJ’s opinion writing alone warrants remand, but finding remand appropriate when the ALJ’s findings were not sufficient to ascertain whether the ALJ’s decision was supported by substantial evidence on the record
• rejecting the argument that deficiency in the ALJ’s opinion writing alone warrants remand, but finding remand appropriate when the ALJ’s findings were not sufficient to ascertain whether the ALJ’s decision was supported by substantial evidence on the record
• requiring a demonstration of meeting “all the requirements of a listing”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).