Josephine L. Cage 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 a reviewing court “defer[s] to the Commissioner’s resolution of conflicting evidence”
• describing a reviewing court's role as deferring to the ALJ's resolution of conflicting evidence
• “[W]e do not substitute our judgment for the agency’s, or determine de novo whether the claimant [was] disabled.” (citations, quotation marks, alterations, and italics omitted)
• “[W]e do not substitute our judgment for the agency’s, or determine de novo whether the claimant [was] disabled.” (alteration adopted) (citations, quotation marks, and italics omitted)
• “In our review, we defer to the Commissioner’s resolution of conflicting evidence.”
• “In our review, we defer to the Commissioner’s resolution of conflicting evidence.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).