William P. Wiggins v. Richard S. Schweiker, Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services

How courts have described this case

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

• remanding where we were “unable to determine whether the ALJ applied the proper legal standard and gave the treating physician’s evidence substantial or considerable weight or found good cause not to do so”
• ALJ’s failure to mention appellant’s treating physician and the weight, if any, given to the treating physician’s opinion constituted grounds for reversal
• “Our standard of review for appeals from the administrative denials of Social Security benefits dictates that ‘(t)he findings of the (en banc)
• “The undersigned [ALJ] gives some substantial [sic] to the opinion of [the] state agency consultant.”
• “Failure . . . to provide the reviewing court with the sufficient basis to determine that the correct legal principles have been followed is grounds for reversal.” (footnote omitted)
• “Failure . . . to provide the reviewing court with the sufficient basis to determine that the correct legal principles have been followed is grounds for reversal.” (footnote omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).