33 N. Dearborn Street, Suite 1130, Chicago, IL 60602
5 Convenient Locations
NO FEE OR COSTS UNLESS WE WIN!
312-999-0999
312-999-8999
Recent Blog Posts
The Reasons Why a Social Security Judge Is Not Allowed to “Play Doctor”
It is a well-established rule in Social Security disability cases that the agency's administrative law judges (ALJs) are not allowed to “play doctor.” That is to say, the ALJ is a layperson, not a doctor or a medical expert. Therefore, when assessing an applicant's disability claim, the ALJ must rely on testimony or evidence offered by such experts rather than trying to diagnosis the claimant themselves.
Court Cites ALJ's Failure to Call Medical Expert in Ordering New Disability Hearing
Unfortunately, this rule is not always so easy to implement in practice. As an Illinois federal magistrate judge observed in a recent disability case, Michelle M. v. Saul, it is often difficult to distinguish “playing doctor” from “merely noting or summarizing the evidence.” Indeed, the magistrate observed that “there do not appear to be many clear rules to determine when the doctor-playing line is crossed.”
Does Looking for Work Disqualify Me from Seeking Disability Benefits?
The Social Security disability application process often puts individuals in a bind. On the one hand, the law requires proof they are unable to hold down even a “sedentary” position. On the other hand, many applicants feel they need to at least apply for work, if for no other reason than to have some source of income while waiting to hear back from Social Security.
But will apply for a job–or even multiple jobs–doom your disability benefits application? The U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, which oversees disability cases here in Illinois, has said in the past that a “job search” by itself does not discredit an applicant's disability claim. In many cases, looking for work may simply reflect a strong internal work ethic or an “overly optimistic outlook” about one's job prospects. But in other cases, Social Security or a court may consider job applications as part of the overall evidence supporting or undermining an individual's claims.
Can My Employment Record Help Make My Case for Disability Benefits?
Mental disorders often pose unique challenges for individuals seeking Social Security disability benefits. It is not always easy to measure the impact of a mental impairment in the same way as a physical limitation. This is why Social Security regulations require agency officials to consider “any other relevant evidence” in addition to an applicant's medical records when assessing the severity of a mental impairment.
Federal Appeals Court Orders New Disability Hearing After Social Security Judge Ignores Evidence
Of course, Social Security has a habit of not always following its own regulations. A recent example of this came in a decision from the U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals here in Chicago, Dunn v. Saul. The plaintiff in this case held down a number of jobs through 2012, at which point he claimed he could no longer work due to his “memory loss.”
How Many Times Will Social Security Hold a Hearing to Assess My Disability?
It is not unusual for Social Security to initially deny a disability claim. This is why there is a process in place to request an administrative hearing, and if necessary appeal a denial. However, there are some cases where Social Security makes repeated mistakes in its handling of a disability application, to the point where the applicant may need to pursue multiple rounds of appeals just to get a fair hearing.
Big Toe Presents Big Headache for Social Security, Federal Judges
One of the more extreme examples of this came in a recent decision from a federal magistrate judge here in Illinois, Dolores R. v. Saul. In this case, the magistrate felt compelled to remand–i.e., return for a new hearing–a case back to Social Security for a third time, largely because the agency's administrative law judge (ALJ) failed to carry out the court's instructions following prior remands. And to put the timeline of this case into perspective, the plaintiff initially filed her application for disability benefits in August 2010–more than nine years ago.
Social Security Often Falls Short in Assessing Depression and Anxiety Claim
Contrary to what some people might think, anxiety and depression are not just euphemisms for “having a bad day.” They are serious mental health disorders. And in severe cases, anxiety and depression can make it impossible for a person to hold down a full-time job–a scenario that may qualify that individual for Social Security disability benefits.
Magistrate Orders New Hearing Due to ALJ's “Distorted Picture” of the Evidence
Of course, it does not help when Social Security administrative law judges (ALJs) fail to properly consider or assess evidence of an applicant's depression and anxiety. Consider this recent disability case from here in Illinois, John B. v. Saul. Here, a federal magistrate judge ordered Social Security to conduct a new disability hearing due to “clear factual errors” made by the ALJ the first time around.
How Does Illiteracy Affect a Person's Eligibility for Disability Benefits?
Strictly speaking, illiteracy is not a disability according to Social Security regulations. In other words, just because a person is unable to read or write, that does not necessarily mean they are incapable of working. But when a person suffers from one or more medical conditions that restrict their ability to work, illiteracy is a factor that Social Security needs to consider when assessing that person's “vocational profile,” i.e., the types of jobs, if any, they can perform despite their impairments.
Magistrate: Using Social Media Does Not Prove You Are Literate
A recent decision from a federal magistrate here in Illinois, Rodney C. v. Saul, illustrates how Social Security is supposed to account for a disability applicant's illiteracy.
The plaintiff in this case applies for disability benefits, citing his degenerative disc disease, diabetes, sleep apnea, and other impairments. After conducting a hearing, a Social Security administrative law judge (ALJ) determined the applicant did not meet the legal standard for disability. After Social Security upheld the ALJ's ruling, the plaintiff sought judicial review with the magistrate.
The Difference Between “Impairments” and “Symptoms” in Disability Cases
In assessing disability claims, Social Security looks at whether or not you have an “impairment” that is considered “severe” enough to prevent you from working. A Social Security administrative law judge (ALJ) is also expected to consider symptoms that, while not qualifying impairments in and of themselves, may exacerbate such an impairment. In particular, the ALJ needs to determine how your symptoms and impairments, taken as a whole, may restrict the type of work you are able to perform, if any.
Social Security Failed to Consider Leg Weakness in Assessing Illinois Woman's Disability Claim
To illustrate these principles in greater detail, here is a recent case, Ramona G. v. Saul, where the ALJ failed to properly consider an applicant's symptoms. The plaintiff, in this case, applies for disability benefits three years ago. The main issue raised in the plaintiff's application was her back impairment. In conjunction with this impairment, the plaintiff also presented medical evidence that she suffered from weakness in her right leg.
Is a Hernia Considered a Disability by Social Security?
A hernia is not the type of impairment that, by itself, qualifies a person for Social Security disability benefits. Indeed, most hernias can be surgically repaired to relieve a person's symptoms. But when surgery is insufficient and the resulting pain and limitations prevent a person from working, then Social Security needs to consider the possibility that person is legally disabled.
Federal Court Rejects Social Security's Attempt to Ignore Treating Physician's Views of Disability Applicant's Condition
As is too often the case, however, Social Security may try and discount the expert opinions of doctors who actually treated an applicant's hernia in an attempt to find the applicant not disabled. The U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals here in Chicago recently addressed such a case, finding Social Security's decision to reject a disability application was not supported by the evidence.
What Does It Mean for Social Security to Give “Some Weight” to My Doctor's Opinions?
The general rule in Social Security disability cases is that agency officials should give “controlling weight” to the medical conclusions of an applicant's treating physicians unless those opinions are not supported by the other evidence presented. If a Social Security administrative law judge (ALJ) decides to give a treating physician's views less-than-controlling weight, it is the ALJ's responsibility to explain their reasons. In fact, there is a required checklist of factors the ALJ is required to follow in such cases.
Magistrate Orders New Hearing After ALJ Fails to Follow “Checklist”
But this does not mean the ALJ actually follows the checklist. A recent decision from a federal magistrate judge here in Illinois, Kenneth P. v. Saul, offers a useful illustration. In this case, the plaintiff suffers from multiple sclerosis (MS) and applied for disability benefits five years ago. A Social Security ALJ denied the plaintiff's application after only giving “some weight” to the medical opinions offered by the plaintiff's treating neurologist.
Does Morbid Obesity Qualify a Person for Disability Benefits?
Obesity does not simply mean a person is a few pounds over their ideal weight. Rather, it is defined as a “complex disease involving an excessive amount of body fat.” In some cases, a person's obesity may be severe enough to qualify them for Social Security disability benefits.
Now, it is important to understand that obesity, in and of itself, is no longer considered a standalone disability by Social Security. That is to say, Social Security will not assume you are unable to work because you suffer from obesity. But Social Security must take obesity into consideration when determining any limitations on your ability to work.
Magistrate: Social Security Acknowledged, But Did Not Discuss, Impact of Disability Applicant's Obesity
A recent decision from a federal magistrate judge here in Illinois illustrates the role obesity should play in a disability application. The plaintiff, in this case, applied for disability benefits, stating he has been unable to work since 2009 due to a variety of impairments, including a back injury, arthritis, and diabetes.
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.
