Joseph BURNS, Appellant v. Jo Anne B. BARNHART, Commissioner of the Social Security Administration

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that ALJ’s decision was not based on substantial evidence because ALJ relied on vocational expert’s response to his deficient hypothetical question
• finding that drowsiness is a typical side effect of medications and that it should not be viewed as disabling “unless the record references serious functional limitations”
• “We also have made clear that we are not permitted to weigh the evidence or substitute our own conclusions for that of the fact-finder.”
• “We also have made clear that we are not permitted to weigh the evidence or substitute our own conclusions for that of the fact-finder.”
• “We examine the ALJ’s conclusions as to [the claimant’s] residual functional capacity with the deference required of the substantial evidence standard of review.”
• “We examine the ALJ’s conclusions as to [the claimant’s] residual functional capacity with the deference required of the substantial evidence standard of review.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).