Posted on February 15, 2019 in Social Security Disability Medical Conditions

Many Illinois residents who apply for Social Security disability benefits find it impossible to focus on the types of daily tasks required by a normal workplace. Social Security's own regulations refer to a person's “concentration, persistence, and pace” to describe such difficulties. In general, if an applicant would be off-task at least 15 percent of the time due to concentration, persistence, and pace issues, that would tend to support a disability claim.

Federal Court Orders Social Security to Conduct New Disability Hearing

But this assumes Social Security administrative law judges (ALJs) actually take concentration, persistence, and pace into account when evaluating a claim. This does not always happen, despite repeated warnings from federal courts that it is the law. Just recently, the U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals here in Chicago ordered Social Security to conduct a new disability hearing for a plaintiff precisely because the ALJ failed to properly account for these limitations.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on February 07, 2019 in Social Security Disability Medical Conditions

Intellectual disabilities often prevent a person from working full-time. But when assessing mental impairments for purposes of awarding Social Security disability benefits, agency officials are often reluctant to conclude that an applicant is incapable of work. In many cases, a Social Security administrative law judge (ALJ) will conclude, even in the face of substantial evidence, that a mentally impaired applicant is still capable of performing some degree of meaningful work.

Court: SSI Applicant Retained “Adaptive Functioning” to Work Despite Mental Impairment

Consider this recent decision by the U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals here in Chicago, Johnson v. Berryhill. The plaintiff, a man in his late 30s, was first diagnosed with learning problems during elementary school. In 1988, a psychologist assessed the plaintiffs IQ at 73, which was considered “very low.” Subsequent IQ tests produced similar results. Indeed, when the plaintiff first applied for Social Security benefits in 2006, a new IQ test produced a full-scale score of 65.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on January 31, 2019 in Denied Social Security Benefits

A key part of the disability application benefits process is when Social Security asks a vocational expert to answer a “hypothetical” question designed to ascertain what potential jobs, if any, exist in the marketplace for a person with certain physical or mental limitations. Remember, it is not enough to prove you have a disability. Social Security also needs to figure out whether your disability–or a combination of disabilities–makes it impossible for you to find meaningful work. The hypothetical question is supposed to help determine the answer.

Seventh Circuit Orders New Hearing for Disability Applicant

But this assumes Social Security asks the right hypothetical question, to begin with. For example, the U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals here in Chicago recently ordered Social Security to conduct a new disability hearing for a plaintiff after determining an administrative law judge (ALJ) asked an “incomplete” hypothetical question. This error alone was sufficient, the court said, to justify reconsideration of the plaintiff's application for disability benefits.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on January 24, 2019 in Denied Social Security Benefits

It is a sad truth that many of our U.S. military veterans suffer from mental health problems, including post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), major depressive disorder, and generalized anxiety disorder. Unfortunately, Social Security officials often compound the suffering of our veterans by refusing to classify them as disabled, even in the face of overwhelming medical evidence. Indeed, there are many cases where the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) considers a veteran disabled but Social Security does not.

Federal Court Identifies Multiple Problems with Social Security Ruling

A recent decision by the U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals here in Chicago illustrates the unnecessary hardships faced by our veterans when dealing with the Social Security disability process. The plaintiff in this case is a 49-year-old woman who served as a chief petty officer in the United States Navy. During her service, the plaintiff was subjected to sexual harassment from her supervising officer. This led the plaintiff to develop migraines and sleeping problems.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on January 17, 2019 in Social Security Disability

Last year, we discussed a case that was pending before the U.S. Supreme Court involving Social Security regulations for compensating lawyers who successfully pursue disability claims on behalf of their clients. On January 8, 2019, the Court issued its decision, which provided important clarification of the law in this area.

Justices: Caps for Agency, Court Representation Are Separate

To briefly review what this case, Culbertson v. Berryhill, was about: A Social Security attorney from Florida represented a woman who was seeking disability benefits. After going through the lengthy administrative review process, Social Security denied the woman's application. The woman then decided to challenge that decision by suing the Social Security Administration in federal court.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on January 10, 2019 in Social Security Disability

One of the key things Social Security looks for when assessing an application for disability benefits is whether or not the applicant can “make an adjustment to other work.” Many people assume they are disabled simply because they cannot go back to their old job. But the legal threshold is whether or not someone with the applicant's impairments and skill level can find any meaningful work in the economy.

To make such assessments, Social Security typically relies on the testimony of vocational experts (VEs), who are asked to estimate the type and number of jobs available to a person who hypothetically matches the disability applicant's profile. Unfortunately, it is not always clear exactly how VEs make their estimates or reach their conclusions with respect to a given disability applicant. To further complicate matters, he VEs often depend upon outdated government classification manuals when examining the types of work available.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on December 31, 2018 in Social Security Disability

One of the cardinal rules of Social Security disability cases is that agency officials are not allowed to “play doctor.” In other words, when a Social Security administrative law judge (ALJ) holds a hearing to decide whether or not an applicant is legally disabled, the ALJ must rely on medical testimony presented by qualified experts. The ALJ is not supposed to rely solely on their own interpretation of medical evidence, since, after all, they are not doctors themselves.

Federal Court Orders New Disability Hearing After ALJ Ignores Medical Evidence

Here is a recent disability case in which Social Security forgot this basic rule. This is taken from a decision by the U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, which has jurisdiction over Illinois, although this particular case originated in Indiana. The plaintiff was a 49-year-old woman who formerly worked as a hairstylist. She stopped working in 2009 due to a variety of ailments, notably degenerative disc disease, fibromyalgia, and depression.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on December 24, 2018 in Social Security Disability

In Social Security disability cases, agency officials will look at two types of medical evidence: The information provided by an applicant’s own treating physicians, and testimony from outside reviewers and consultative examiners, who typically look at an applicant’s medical records but do not necessarily examine them in person. When one’s own doctor's medical opinions are supported by appropriate treatment records, Social Security is expected to afford such views substantial weight, even if they conflict with the opinions of the outside consultants.

Magistrate Orders New Hearing After Social Security Ignores Evidence from Applicant's Psychiatrist

In far too many disability cases, Social Security does not provide the proper weight to the opinions of an applicant’s own physician. A Social Security administrative law judge (ALJ) will often credit the views of the outside experts–who often believe the applicant is not disabled–and ignore the contrary opinions of the treating physician. While this is not necessarily against regulations, the ALJ cannot simply ignore evidence.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on December 17, 2018 in Social Security Disability

Not everyone who applies for Social Security disability benefits is incapable of performing some degree of work. However, one of the questions a Social Security official needs to consider is: How often will a person be absent from work or “off-task” due to their physical or mental impairments? After all, a person who needs to take 10 days a month off to deal with their disability is not exactly employable in any traditional sense of the word. For this reason, Social Security needs to not only make inquiries about the effects of a disability applicant's potential absenteeism, but the agency must also incorporate a proper assessment of such limitations in reaching a final decision.

Social Security Fails to Properly Address Limits on Disability Applicant's Ability to Remain On-Task

In one recent case, Social Security fell short of the mark when assessing absenteeism. In Hawist v. Berryhill, the plaintiff applied for disability benefits due to a number of impairments, including “osteoarthritis, back, knee, and shoulder pain, learning difficulty, depression, anxiety, and substance abuse,” according to court records. At a hearing, a Social Security administrative law judge (ALJ) posed several hypothetical questions to a vocational expert (VE). Such questions are commonly used to assess the types of jobs a person with the applicant's symptoms can hold when accounting for certain impairments.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on December 10, 2018 in Denied Social Security Benefits

There is a common misunderstanding with respect to disability insurance. When considering your application for disability benefits, Social Security does not just evaluate whether or not you are medically able to perform your past work. It must decide whether you are capable of performing any type of sustained work. This distinction is often used as reasoning to deny benefits to an applicant.

Judge Orders Social Security to Reconsider Disabled Truck Driver's Claim

An applicant's failure to completely understand the law, however, does not in and of itself justify denying disability benefits. This point was hit home by a recent decision from a federal judge here in Illinois. In this case, King v. Berryhill, the plaintiff previously worked as a truck driver. He stopped working in 2008 due to chronic back pain, for which he did not seek treatment until six years later. In 2014, the plaintiff's treating physician diagnosed him with “severe lumbar degeneration” and several related conditions. 

Continue Reading ››