Potenza v. Giaimo

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that reversal and remand was required where “[t]here is simply no reliable evidence providing a basis for the specific conclusion that Noerper can stand or walk for 6 hours in an 8-hour workday”
• stating that an RFC is a decision that must be supported by evidence of ability to function in the workplace
• noting that because “the disability -20- determination is not an adversarial process,” “[w]e have repeatedly recognized” that the Commissioner shares a duty, alongside the claimant, to prove the claimant’s case
• stating that an ALJ must explain how they “translated [their] understanding of [a claimant’s] physical symptoms into the conclusion that [the claimant] could stand or walk for 6 hours of an 8- hour workday”
• finding that the “the absence of evidence to suggest the accuracy or propriety of” an ascribed standing limitation demonstrated that the ALJ did not fulfill the duty to fully develop the record and warranted remand
• finding that the “the absence of evidence to suggest the accuracy or propriety of” an ascribed standing limitation demonstrated that the ALJ did not fulfill the duty to fully develop the record and warranted remand

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).