Newbold v. Astrue

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that ALJ may discount physician’s opinion that is inconsistent with other medical evidence from the relevant time period
• recognizing that ALJ may support his adverse credibility finding with evidence of daily activities that are inconsistent with allegations of “debilitating fatigue and widespread pain”
• concluding ALJ reasonably discounted treating physician’s opinion that the claimant had extreme limitations because it was inconsistent with the claimant’s daily activities
• noting the court will “neither reweigh the evidence nor substitute [its] judgment for that of the agency”
• affirming the ALJ’s decision discounting the treating physician’s opinion where the doctor’s treatment note from the same day was inconsistent with the doctor’s opinion
• affirming an ALJ”s rejection of a medical source opinion in part because it was inconsistent with objective findings from the same day

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).