Phillips v. Barnhart
Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.
Status
More on how this was screened
Jones v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner later identified Phillips as a statement of that rule. Phillips's separate holding about when vocational expert testimony is needed at step five remains in use. The confirmed treatment is listed below. All 35 flagged citations have been read.
35 later cases cite Phillips v. Barnhart; 35 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.
Relying on Phillips v. Barnhart?
This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.
Treatments
Abrogated
-
The Eleventh Circuit held that the new regulation abrogated Phillips's rule requiring substantial or considerable weight for treating physicians' opinions absent good cause, for claims filed on or after March 27, 2017.
Harner v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner · Eleventh Circuit · filed
The new regulation, 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520c (2017), abrogated the “treating-physician rule” first developed by this and other courts of appeals.
Read the full opinion on CourtListener →
Does this case still carry your argument?
Describe your facts. Ezel reads Phillips v. Barnhart and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace