Southfield, MI
Social Security & Disability Lawyer at Southfield, MI
Practice Areas: Social Security
OUTCOME: The ALJ did not give good reasons for discounting the opinions of the treating doctors.
The importance of the treating physician’s opinion.
OUTCOME: The ALJ relied on flawed vocational testimony to the extent that it was based on the assumption that Seay had transferable skills acquired from his past jobs.
Issues relating to Plaintiff’s past relevant work and whether (1) an unsuccessful work attempt cannot be considered past relevant work and (2) how to determine transferable skills acquired from past wo ... rk.
OUTCOME: The Sixth Circuit rejected the proposition that all afflictions must be spelled out but the hypothetical question should include an accurate portrayal of a claimant's individual physical and mental impairments.
I argued that hypothetical questions posed by the ALJ to the vocational expert must adequately convey a Plaintiff’s concentration/mental health limitations.
OUTCOME: As long as substantial evidence supports a decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying benefits, the Court of Appeals must defer to it, even if there is substantial evidence in the record that would have supported an opposite conclusion.
The role of the treating doctor’s opinion in determining a disability under Social Security Law. Treating physician’s opinions must be given substantial deference in Social Security disability cases wh ... en supported by the objective evidence.
OUTCOME: A reversal of the U.S. District Court refusal to address the unjust conclusions of the Administrative Law Judge's (ALJ) who based his decision, in part, on an erroneous factual predicate.
United States Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit. Final disposition of case: The ALJ found that the claimant's condition did not prevent him from returning to his past relevant work because the cla ... imant was able to cook and clean for himself, do his own shopping, visit his mother and girlfriend, attend to his duties at the community college two days a week and attend his physician and psychiatrist appointments. However, it was ruled that the ALJ mischaracterized said activities. Hence, the case was remanded for redetermination.
OUTCOME: The court concluded that the ALJ has the discretion to determine the appropriate weight to accord a chiropractor's opinion based on all evidence in the record.
Whether the treating chiropractor’s findings of disability should be considered in the absence of evidence to the contrary or a showing of nonreliability.
Ad
Transform legal challenges into solutions.
Connect now to review your situation.
