Paulina BLUVBAND, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Margaret HECKLER, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant-Appellee

How courts have described this case

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

• ALJ should not baldly accept consulting physicians’ evaluations which are disputed and formulated after they had examined claimant only once
• evaluations by consulting physicians, which were “critically disputed” and based on only one examination of claimant, did not constitute substantial evidence contradicting treating physician’s opinion
• AU cannot baldly accept findings of consulting physicians who have examined plaintiff once as substantial evidence contradicting treating physician’s opinion of total disability without commenting specifically on the credibility of claimant’s crucial contrary testimony
• “It is well-established in this circuit that the expert opinions of a treating physician as to the existence of a disability are binding on the fact finder unless contradicted by substantial evidence to the contrary.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).