Richardson v. Perales, 402 U.S. 389 (1971), was a case heard by the United
States Supreme ... Is the Social Security Act to be interpreted liberally in matters
of disability determination? 9.) Are S...
Richardson v. .... The Bureau of Disability Insurance of the Social Security
Administration made its .... The Social Security Act has been with us since 1935.
Richardson v. ... physicians who have examined claimant for disability insurance
benefit under Social Security Act constitute "substantial evidence" supporting a ...
Jun 27, 2011 ... ... could constitute "substantial evidence" supportive of finding nondisability under
the Social Security Act. — Excerpted from Richardson v.
Adams v. Bowen (disability--statutory blindness provision), 90-5c. Alexander v.
Richardson (duration of inability to engage in substantial gainful activity), 73-7c.
See Richardson v. Perales, 402 U.S. 389, 402 (1971); Roark v. Califano, No. 77-
1557 (8th Cir., October 13, 1977); Reams v. Finch, 313 F. Supp. 1272 (N. D. Ia.
Dec 31, 1991 ... The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals interpreted the Supreme Court's holding in
Richardson v. Perales, 402 U.S. 389 (1971) to mean that, under ...
Richardson v. Perales, 402 U.S. 389 (1971), substantially altered this picture. In
Perales, the Supreme Court held that a Social Security examiner could credit ...
See Richardson v. Perales, 402 U.S. 389, 28 L. Ed. 2d 842, 91 S. Ct. 1420 (1971)
. But the idea that experts should use reliable methods does not depend on ...
See Sit. v. Schweiker, 671 F.2d 19, 22 (1st Cir. 1982); Estep v. Richardson, 459 F.
2d ... In order to qualify for disability benefits under the Social Security Act, ...