33 N. Dearborn Street, Suite 1130, Chicago, IL 60602

5 Convenient Locations

Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Youtube
Search

NO FEE OR COSTS UNLESS WE WIN!

call us312-999-0999fax312-999-8999

Recent blog posts

b2ap3_thumbnail_disability_20200401-004725_1.jpgSocial Security disability is a form of insurance. This means that you can only apply for benefits if you are actually covered–insured–at the time you became disabled. In most cases, your “date last insured” for disability purposes is five years after you left your last job.

Appeals Court: Social Security May Not Ignore Medical Opinions Rendered After Date Last Insured

But can Social Security consider a medical diagnosis or opinion rendered by your doctor after your date last insured (DLI) when assessing your disability claim? The U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals here in Chicago recently addressed this question in an unpublished decision, Marquardt v. Saul. The plaintiff in this case applied for disability benefits based on his lupus and related impairments.

The plaintiff's date last insured was July 2013. In his application to Social Security, the plaintiff said his lupus rendered him unable to work prior to this date. However, he also submitted two reports from his treating neurologist, which were prepared in 2015 and 2016, respectively. These reports established the plaintiff suffered from cognitive defects as a result of his lupus. These defects, in turn, limited the plaintiff to performing “single-task jobs with breaks and no distractions.”

...

IL disability lawyerAs a general rule, your own doctor knows your medical condition best. In the context of a Social Security disability benefits hearing, an administrative law judge (ALJ) is therefore required to give your doctor's views “controlling weight,” so long as the doctor's opinions are supported by the available medical evidence. If the ALJ chooses to discount or disregard your doctor's diagnosis, the ALJ must provide “good reasons” for that decision, which also must be supported by evidence.

Christopher C. v. Saul

What the ALJ may not do is misrepresent the evidence in order to discredit your doctor's testimony. Unfortunately, this happens more than Social Security would like to admit. Just recently, an Illinois federal magistrate judge ordered Social Security to conduct a new disability hearing precisely because an ALJ failed to follow the rules in assessing a treating physician's views.

The plaintiff in this case, Christopher C. v. Saul, suffers from physical impairments related to his left ankle and obstructive pulmonary disease. The plaintiff's treating podiatrist said that as a result of the plaintiff's impairments, he would “need to elevate his leg just above hip level about 20 to 50 percent of an eight-hour workday due to edema, pain, and inflammation.” The plaintiff would also require a cane to stand and walk and could not lift more than 10 pounds. He was also incapable of stooping, bending, crouching, squatting, or climbing stairs or ladders.

...

IL disability lawyerIn reviewing your application for disability benefits, Social Security will not just look at your medical record. It will also review many other aspects of your personal life, such as your ability to perform household tasks or even the vacations you have taken. In some cases, a Social Security administrative law judge (ALJ) may even cite the fact you went on vacation as proof your testimony regarding your disability is not “credible.”

Magistrate: Vacations Do Not Disprove Disability Applicant's Testimony Regarding Her Panic Attacks

Federal courts, however, have cautioned Social Security not to simply assume an applicant is not credible simply because they were able to go on vacation. A recent decision from an Illinois federal magistrate judge, Lorena T. v. Saul, provides a case in point. The plaintiff here applied for disability benefits based on a number of mental impairments, including her frequent panic attacks. The ALJ ruled the plaintiff did not legally qualify for disability benefits, but the magistrate reversed that decision and ordered a new hearing.

As the magistrate noted, the ALJ expressed “skepticism towards [the plaintiff's] panic attack allegations throughout his opinion.” Among other reasons for this skepticism, the ALJ cited the fact the plaintiff went on two vacations, one to Florida and the other to New York and New Jersey. Both times the plaintiff said she suffered panic attacks, but the ALJ insisted this undercut her credibility. In particular, the ALJ did not understand why the plaintiff took her second vacation after allegedly suffering a panic attack during the Florida vacation.

...

You are not alone. Call now for a FREE consultation 312-999-0999

Unable to travel to my office? No problem! No office visit required.

dupage county bar association Chicago abr association nosscr Super Lawyer
Back to Top