Sousa v. Astrue

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that the opinion of a vocational expert qualifies as substantial evidence at the fifth step of the analysis
• \The opinion of a vocational expert that a Social Security claimant can perform certain jobs gualifies as substantial evidence at the fifth step of the analysis\
• “The hearing officer is not required to—nor could he reasonably—discuss every piece of evidence in the record.”
• “The hearing officer is not required to—nor could he reasonably—discuss every piece of evidence in the record.”
• “The hearing officer 7 Medeiros also contends that Dr. Whitehorn’s opinion presumed that he had a stabilized mental status. (Pl. Mem. at 7
• “The hearing officer is not required to—nor could [she] reasonably—discuss every piece of evidence in the record.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).