Matter of Vogin

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the ALJ was not required to include in the hypothetical impairments from a doctor’s opinion that the ALJ properly rejected
• holding that the ALJ was not required to include impairments in a hypothetical that were unsupported by record
• explaining that an ALJ must always give good reasons for discounting the opinion of a treating physician
• noting that ALJ was not required to include impairments in hypothetical that were not supported by the record
• explaining that an ALJ must always give good reasons for discounting the opinion of a treating physician
• stating that “we have upheld an ALJ’s decision to discount or even disregard the opinion of a treating physician ... where a treating physician renders inconsistent opinions that undermine the credibility of such opinions”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).