Micky McDivet Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Micky McDivet - Assignment Exampleand where the decision under consideration is that of the ALJ, two bills of brush up are commonly considered, namely substantial evidence, and de novo.A substantial evidence standard of review was defined in Richardson v Perales. 402 US 389, 401 (1971) as such(prenominal) relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a decision. A reviewing court must set aside the decision of the trial court if it finds that the evidence used in supporting the decision lacks substance taking into count the evidence in the cases record that opposed such findings (Universal Camera Corp v NLRB 340 US 474, 488 1951). In deciding whether evidence is substantial or not, the US Supreme Court in the Richardson case reminds appellate courts that is more than a mere scintilla. Five decided cases that made use of this standard are the followersA de novo standard of review is one where a reviewing court makes an original appraisal of all the ev idence to decide whether or not it believes the conclusions of the trial court (Bose alliance v Consumers Union of the US, Inc. 466 US 485, 514 1984). A de novo standard of review applies when there is an error of fairness (Kober v Apfel, 133 F.Supp.2d 868 2001 or a mixed error of law and facts (Johnson v Employment Security, 112 Wn.2d 172 1989). This standard of review was used in the following casesAny decision to elevate Mickey McDivet case must take into account the two standards of review, which the federal district courts commonly use in reviewing a case. The issues that an appealing party cites as basis for the appeal usually determine the standard that the court result use. An assignment of error of law, for example, will subject it to a de novo standard review and an assignment of error of fact on the part of the ALJ will subject it to a substantial evidence standard of review. An assignment of both types will create subject it to both