Biestek v. Berryhill

Total
0
Shares

Holding: A vocational expert’s refusal to provide private market-survey data during a Social Security disability benefits hearing upon the applicant’s request does not categorically preclude the testimony from counting as “substantial evidence” in federal court under 42 U. S. C. §405(g).

Judgment: Affirmed, 6-3, in an opinion by Justice Kagan on April 1, 2019. Justice Sotomayor filed a dissenting opinion. Justice Gorsuch filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Ginsburg joined.

You May Also Like

Yellen v. Collins

Holding: Because the Federal Housing Finance Agency did not exceed its authority under the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 as a conservator of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac,…
View More

Trump v. New York

Holding: Because the challengers have not shown standing and because the claims presented are not ripe for adjudication, the district court’s judgment is vacated, and the case is remanded with…
View More

Nestlé USA, Inc. v. Doe I

Holding: To plead facts sufficient to support a domestic application of the Alien Tort Statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1350, plaintiffs must allege more domestic conduct than general corporate activity. Judgment: Reversed and…
View More

Cargill, Inc. v. Doe I

Holding: To plead facts sufficient to support a domestic application of the Alien Tort Statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1350, plaintiffs must allege more domestic conduct than general corporate activity. Judgment: Reversed and…
View More