Fifth Circuit· 7/13/2000

Loza v. Apfel

Citations

219 F.3d 378
2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 16052
2000 WL 966719

How courts have described this case

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

concluding that “[n]o good cause appears in the ALJ opinion or in the record to justify the ALJ’s failure to give ‘considerable weight’ to the treating doctors’ medical evidence”
holding the ALJ cannot impact” on ability to perform the full range of sedentary work.
holding “it is clear that the ALJ must consider all the record evidence and cannot ‘pick and choose’ only the evidence that supports his position.”
noting that “[s]ubsequent medical evidence is [also] relevant . . . because it may bear upon the severity of the claimant’s condition before the expiration of his or her insured status”
stating that inquiry as to an ALJ finding is “whether the record, read as a whole, yields such evidence as would allow a reasonable mind to accept the conclusions reached by the ALJ”
remanding for reconsideration where ALJ erred by only evaluating consequences of claimant’s mental and physical impairments individually and by not considering their combined effects

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Duhé, Barksdale, Dennis

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

73 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

68 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.