Mentor, OH
Social Security & Disability Lawyer at Mentor, OH
Practice Areas: Social Security, Appeals ... +2 more
OUTCOME: Remand to the Agency for new hearing.
Successfully argued that reversal and remand is warranted because the ALJ did not consider or failed to properly consider all the evidence in the record. Specifically, the ALJ ignored evidence of Scapp ... ino's diagnosis of fibromyalgia and the medical opinion of Scappino's physical therapist.
OUTCOME: Remand to the Agency for new hearing.
Successfully argued that the ALJ's hypothetical question to the Vocational Expert (and ultimately the ALJ's residual functional capacity finding), was not supported by substantial evidence because it o ... mitted medically established pace-based restrictions without explanation.
OUTCOME: Remand to the Agency for new hearing.
Successfully argued that the ALJ improperly "played doctor" by throwing out all the medical opinions of record and interpreting raw medical data on his own.
OUTCOME: Remand to the Agency for new hearing.
Successfully argued that the ALJ erred in concluding that M.L., a minor, did not have a marked limitation in the domain of interacting and relating with others. Because the ALJ selectively considered ... evidence regarding M.L.'s social functioning, the ALJ's decision was found to be without the support of substantial evidence.
OUTCOME: Remand to the Agency for new hearing.
Successfully argued that the ALJ's residual functional capacity finding was not support by substantial evidence because it excluded Moretti's reaching limitations. The Court held that the ALJ was not f ... ree to exclude limitations stemming from medical opinions assigned "great weight" by the ALJ without explanation.
OUTCOME: Remand to the Agency for new hearing.
Successfully argued the ALJ erred by failing to provide any rationale for his finding that Teel's back condition did not meet or equal Listing 1.04(C). The Court found the ALJ needed to actually evalua ... te the evidence, compare it to Section 1.00 of the Listing, and give an explained conclusion, in order to facilitate meaningful judicial review. By failing to do so, it was impossible to say that the ALJ's decision at Step Three was supported by substantial evidence.
OUTCOME: Remand to the Agency for new hearing.
Successfully argued that the ALJ improperly considered the findings of the first ALJ who denied Blackburn's earlier claim for benefits. The first ALJ found Blackburn could not perform jobs with “strict ... time or production pressures.” The most recent ALJ did not include this limitation in her hypotheticals to the Vocational Expert. The Court held that under the doctrine of res judicata the ALJ was bound by the “favorable subsidiary finding from the previous decision unless there was new and material evidence to the contrary.” The failure to explain the exclusion of "strict time or production pressures" from the most recent decision was reversible error.
OUTCOME: Remand to the Agency for new hearing.
Successfully argued the ALJ erred by failing to provide any rationale for her finding that Davis's multiple sclerosis did not meet or equal Listing 11.09. The Court found the ALJ needed to actually eva ... luate the evidence, compare it to Section 11.00 of the Listing, and give an explained conclusion, in order to facilitate meaningful judicial review. By failing to do so, it was impossible to say that the ALJ's decision at Step Three was supported by substantial evidence.