Sherry Howard, on Behalf of Sarah Wolff v. Jo Anne Barnhart, Commissioner, Social Security Administration

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the ALJ erred by relying on individual reports offered by various 4 specialists, each limiting their opinions to their areas of specialty
• holding that an “ALJ is not required to discuss evidence that is neither significant nor probative”
• ruling that the ALJ is responsible for “interpret[ing] the medical evidence”
• explaining that an “ALJ is not required to discuss evidence that is neither significant nor probative”
• stating that “in interpreting the evidence and developing the record, the ALJ does not need to ‘discuss every 20 piece of evidence’” (citations omitted)
• stating that “in interpreting the evidence and developing the record, the 14 ALJ does not need to discuss every piece of evidence” (quotation marks omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).