stating that “ ‘the substantiality of evidence must take into account whatever in the record fairly detracts from its weight’ ”
How later courts described this case
- stating that “ ‘the substantiality of evidence must take into account whatever in the record fairly detracts from its weight’ ”
- holding that the Court “may not try the case de novo, nor resolve conflicts in evidence, nor decide questions of credibility”
- reviewing the Commissioner’s decision “to determin[e] whether the findings of fact ... are supported by substantial evidence and ... whether the [Commissioner] employed the proper legal criteria in reaching her conclusion”
- recognizing that an ALJ’s decision must be read as a whole
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
BAILEY BROWN, Senior Circuit Judge.
I respectfully dissent.
With respect to disability benefits, I agree with the district judge that the determination of the Secretary that Garner was not disabled within the meaning of the Act as of June 30, 1981, when he was last insured for disability benefits, is supported by substantial evidence.
*392 I would, however, remand to the district court because the district court did, in ef-feet, determine that the Secretary’s finding that Garner was not disabled for a period of one year from August, 1981, is not supported by substantial evidence. Since it was not necessary for Garner to show, for purposes of SSI benefits, that he was disabled as of June 30, 1981, there appears to be no reason why the district judge should not have directed the award of SSI benefits. For this reason, it seems to me that the case should be remanded to the district court to reconsider since his conclusion is inconsistent with his finding.