Legal Opinion

Stancavage v. Saul

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania

Decided June 29, 2020No. 1:19-cv-01296Unknown

1Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA KATHLEEN A. STANCAVAGE, : Civil No. 1:19-CV-1296 : Plaintiff : (Magistrate Judge Carlson) : v. : : ANDREW M. SAUL : Commissioner of Social Security1 : : Defendant : MEMORANDUM OPINION I. Introduction The Supreme Court has recently underscored for us the limited scope of our review when considering Social Security appeals, noting that: The phrase “substantial evidence” is a “term of art” used throughout administrative law to describe how courts are to review agency factfinding. T-Mobile South, LLC v. Roswell, 574 U.S. ––––,…

2Cases cited46 opinions

  1. Richardson v. PeralesSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  2. Biestek v. BerryhillSupreme Court of the United States · 2019
  3. Consolidated Edison Co. v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  4. Bowen v. YuckertSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  5. Pierce v. UnderwoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1988

41 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API