Qualls v. Apfel

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that an ALJ’s failure to include an alleged limitation in the RFC is not error if the limitation is not supported by the medical record
• noting that an ALJ’s failure to include an alleged limitation in the RFC is not error if the limitation is not supported by the medical record; see also Barnett v. Apfel, 231 F.3d 687, 689 (10th Cir. 2000
• rejecting such an argument where the ALJ’s RFC contains limits “not inconsistent” with the suggested RFCs of consultative examiners
• finding an ALJ’s hypothetical questioning of the VE provided an appropriate basis for the denial of benefits because the question “included all the limitations the ALJ ultimately included in his RFC assessment.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).