Spriggs v. Commonwealth

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that an ALJ is not required to order a consultative examination where the plaintiff is represented by counsel and there is no conflict, inconsistency, ambiguity, or insufficiency in the evidence that must be resolved
• stating that a court may not adopt the Commissioner’s post hoc rationalizations for agency action
• explaining that courts review de novo those portions of the Magistrate Judge’s findings and recommendations that have been properly preserved with a specific objection
• stating that a court “may not ‘create post-hoc rationalizations to explain the Commissioner’s treatment of evidence when that treatment is not apparent from the Commissioner’s decision itself[]”
• “[FJaulting a person with a diagnosed mental illness for failing to pursue mental health treatment is a ‘questionable practice.’”
• “[F]aulting a person with a diagnosed mental illness for failing to pursue mental health treatment is a ‘questionable practice.’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).