Rockwood v. Astrue

How courts have described this case

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

• remanding where “the Court cannot determine whether the [hearing officer] incorrectly overlooked some of [claimant’s non-exertional] limitations [in the RFC finding]”
• no obligation for ALJ to discuss obesity where examining physicians failed to discuss Plaintiffs obesity as a contributing factor to Plaintiffs impairments
• ALJ’s incorrect rendition of facts “|was harmless error when credibility assessment was amply supported by other substantial evidence
• case predates Cichocki, and the court notes that the ALJ’s decision did not contain any specificity regarding the plaintiff’s functional abilities
• an “ALJ’s unwarranted assumption” regarding a plaintiff's testimony does not necessarily mean “substantial evidence did not support the ALJ’s finding[]” regarding the plaintiff's overall credibility
• “When rejecting subjective complaints, an ALJ must do so ‘explicitly and with sufficient specificity to enable the Court to decide whether there are legitimate reasons for the ALJ’s disbelief.’” (quoting Brandon v. Bowen, 666 F. Supp. 604, 608 (S.D.N.Y.1987))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).