Roby v. Croan

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that by responding to the hypothetical posed by the ALJ without requesting clarification, the VE affirmed he understood the hypothetical, and citing Thompson v. Astrue, 2013 WL 265239, at (W.D.N.Y. Jan. 23, 2013
• “A hypothetical question that does not present the full extent of a claimant’s impairments cannot provide a sound basis for vocational expert testimony.”
• “While the Commissioner is thus free to decide that the opinions of ‘other sources’ . . . are entitled to no weight or little weight, those decisions should be explained.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).