Spiva v. Astrue

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that error is not harmless if ALJ may have reached a different conclusion absent that error
• recognizing that remand from harmless error is a “waste of time” where the error would not change the outcome of the ALJ’s decision
• holding that remand is not warranted when it is “predictable with great confidence that the agency will reinstate its decision on remand”
• holding that remand is unnecessary when there is only harmless error
• explaining that the harmless error doctrine permits affirmance where “it is predictable with great confidence that the agency will reinstate its decision on remand”
• explaining that the harmless error doctrine permits affirmance where “it is predictable with great confidence that the agency will reinstate its decision on remand”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).