Posted on April 25, 2019 in Social Security Disability Medical Conditions

In making your case for disability benefits, it is important to present Social Security with as much expert medical evidence as possible. Otherwise, an agency administrative law judge (ALJ) may attempt to “fill in the gaps” with their own, non-expert opinions. And while such conduct contradicts the law governing disability benefits, the burden is then on the applicant to show the error on appeal, which only makes the process go slower.

Magistrate to Social Security ALJ: “Not a Doctor. Shh.”

To give an example, a federal magistrate judge recently began an opinion reversing Social Security's decision to deny an application for disability benefits with a quote from the popular television program Brooklyn Nine-Nine: “Not a doctor. Shh.”

The magistrate was expressing his frustration at yet another instance of an ALJ impermissibly “playing doctor” when it comes to assessing an applicant's medical limitations in the workplace. In this particular case, the magistrate said the ALJ simply ignored the “only evidence in the record” because it contradicted the ALJ's opinions.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on April 18, 2019 in Denied Social Security Benefits

Social Security disability decisions are supposed to be based on medical evidence, such as the findings of your treating physician. When there is a conflict in the medical evidence–i.e., different doctors reach different diagnoses–a Social Security administrative law judge (ALJ) is entitled to decide which evidence is more credible and consistent with the overall record. However, the ALJ cannot simply ignore uncontradicted medical evidence and substitute his or her own non-medical judgment.

Magistrate Rejects ALJ's Finding That Disabled Applicant Could Use Both of His Hands

When ALJs overstep their boundaries, a disability applicant may have recourse on appeal to a federal court if their claim for disability benefits was ultimately denied. Here is a recent example from here in Illinois. In this case, Andrew B. v. Berryhill, a former bus driver (the plaintiff) applied for disability benefits in 2014, citing a variety of impairments, including carpal tunnel syndrome, torn ligaments in his hands, and arthritis.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on April 04, 2019 in Social Security Disability

Social Security officials will often cite a person's ability to perform certain basic tasks as “proof” they are not entitled to disability benefits. But the whole point of disability is that a person lacks the physical or mental capacity to work full-time, which is not the same thing as, say, being able to use a computer a few minutes a day.

Magistrate: Casual Activities Does Not Prove Disability Applicant Can Sit All Day

A recent Social Security disability case from here in Illinois offers a helpful example of what we are talking about. In this case, the plaintiff applied for Social Security Disability Insurance benefits in 2012. Following a hearing, an administrative law judge (ALJ) denied the application. The plaintiff then asked a federal court to reverse the ALJ's decision and order a new hearing.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on April 02, 2019 in Social Security Disability

A key component of a Social Security disability hearing is the testimony of a “vocational expert” or VE. The VE's function is to assess the type and quantity of jobs available to a “hypothetical” person with the same physical and mental impairment as the disability applicant. Unfortunately, many VEs are not forthcoming with how they arrive at their conclusions. That is to say, the VE does not provide either the applicant or the Social Security administrative law judge (ALJ) with the actual data relied upon.

Kagan: Court Rejects “Categorical” Rule Requiring Disclosure of “Private” Data

The U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, which has intermediate appellate jurisdiction over disability cases in Illinois, has long held that Social Security cannot rely on the testimony of a VE who refuses to produce their methodology upon the applicant's request. But on April 1, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected such a “categorical” rule and said that going forward, appellate courts would have to decide on a “case-by-case basis” whether a refusal to produce data is unreasonable, with appellate court deferring to the judgment of Social Security ALJs.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on March 29, 2019 in Social Security Disability Medical Conditions

Social Security officials often deny applications for disability benefits  because they fail to properly consider all of the available medical evidence. This includes not just evidence regarding an applicant's physical condition, but also their mental state. That is to say, Social Security may incorrectly–and illegally–discount the expert opinions of a disability applicant's treating psychiatrist.

Mischler v. Berryhill

The U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals here in Chicago recently addressed such a case. The plaintiff here is a 47-year-old woman who suffers from a number of physical and mental impairments, including depression. More than five years ago, the plaintiff applied for disability benefits.

Before a Social Security administrative law judge (ALJ), the plaintiff presented evidence that she was first diagnosed with major depressive disorder in 2001. As is often the case with psychiatric disorders, the plaintiff's symptoms ebbed and flowed over time. In 2008, she required hospitalization for her depression. And starting in 2003, she began seeing a psychiatrist.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on March 21, 2019 in Denied Social Security Benefits

When Social Security denies an application for disability benefits, the applicant has the right to appeal. The appeals process often includes a number of stages, including filing a formal petition for review with a federal judge, who has the authority to order Social Security to conduct a new hearing on your application.

Judge: ALJ Used “Template” Language, Failed to Explain Reasons for Rejecting Disability Claim

Your chances on appeal are much stronger if you are represented by an experienced Social Security disability attorney. But there are cases where a disability applicant has represented themselves and still managed to prevail on appeal. In fact, it happened just recently to a woman from right here in Illinois.

The plaintiff in this case first applied for disability benefits six years ago, citing her inability to work due to diabetes and blindness in one eye. A Social Security administrative law judge (ALJ) held a hearing on the plaintiff's application in 2016. After hearing the plaintiff's testimony and other evidence, however, the ALJ denied the application for benefits.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on March 14, 2019 in Denied Social Security Benefits

As we have discussed many times before, it often takes many years for a disability applicant to receive a final decision from Social Security. And in many of those cases, there may be several years of additional appeals following a denial of disability benefits. During this lengthy period, many disability applicants, unfortunately, pass away. Under the law, the applicant's spouse, children, or other beneficiaries may continue to pursue the disability claim.

Magistrate Rules Social Security Failed to Properly Justify Decision Denying Now-Deceased Woman Disability Benefits

Just recently, a federal judge here in Illinois ruled in favor of a widower who sought to reverse a Social Security decision denying his late wife's claim for disability benefits. The deceased injured her back in 2012 while working at a retail store. The injury was severe enough that she required surgery. But even then, she continued to suffer from chronic leg and back pain. This eventually led to her filing an application for disability benefits in 2014.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on March 07, 2019 in Denied Social Security Benefits

In looking at an application for disability benefits, Social Security officials must determine how your physical and mental impairments affect your ability to work in a practical sense. That is to say, if your doctors tell Social Security you can only work under certain medical restrictions, an administrative law judge (ALJ) must factor those limitations into a final evaluation of your “residual functional capacity” to work.

ALJ Failed to Consider Impact of Plaintiff's Need to Elevate His Leg Throughout the Day

Let's consider a recent disability case from here in Illinois where the ALJ failed to do this, at least in the view of a federal magistrate judge who ordered Social Security to reconsider its decision. The plaintiff in this case first applied for disability benefits more than five years ago. Although Social Security did find the plaintiff was disabled, it fixed the “onset date” of the disability in May 2014. The plaintiff alleged a much earlier onset date in September 2011.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on February 28, 2019 in Social Security Disability Medical Conditions

In a recent post, we discussed a federal appeals court decision that chastised Social Security for its failure to properly consider the limits on a disability applicant's "concentration, persistence, and pace.” Such limitations are relevant when assessing an applicant's hypothetical ability to work in spite of their medical impairments. Yet Social Security administrative law judges (ALJs) routinely downplay limitations on concentration, persistence, and pace when questioning vocational experts (VEs) at disability hearings.

Court: ALJ Failed to Ask the Right Question of Vocational Expert

And in fact, the same federal appeals court that handed down the decision we previously discussed had to remind Social Security of this yet again. On February 26, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit here in Chicago ordered Social Security to conduct a new disability hearing after the ALJ failed to “properly address” the plaintiff's “limitations in concentration, persistence, or pace.”

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on February 21, 2019 in Social Security Disability

Even if you otherwise meet the legal definition of disabled, Social Security may still deny your claim for disability benefits if there is evidence that you can still perform your “past relevant work.” In some cases, Social Security makes this assessment by referencing the Dictionary of Occupational Titles. This is an outdated catalog previously published by the U.S. Department of Labor that purported to define approximately 13,000 different types of work available throughout the country.

Although the dictionary has not been updated since the 1990s, Social Security continues to rely on it in disability cases. Federal courts have tried to restrict the use of the dictionary. In fact, the U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, which has jurisdiction over disability appeals from Illinois, has said that for “composite jobs”–i.e., a position that has “significant elements of two or more occupations”–Social Security may not rely on the dictionary at all.

Continue Reading ››