Archives

Archives: 12/17/04 to  3/23/05


On April 15, 2005, Mark DeBofsky spoke at the Patient Advocate Foundation National Legal Symposium in Chicago, Illinois.

On April 9, 2005, David A. Bryant spoke at an ITLA seminar in Chicago, Illinois, about Medicare Liens, Medicare Set Asides, Supplemental Needs Trusts & ERISA Liens.

The following article by Mark DeBofsky appeared in the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin‘s Workplace Issues section on March 22, 2005: Social Security findings should play key role. Click on the link to read the article.

posted 3/23/2005


Meeks v. Barnhart, No. 2:03-cv-067 (N.D. IN March 7, 2005). The court found that the ALJ had inappropriately relied on an outdated activity report and two evaluating physician’s reports and had ignored evidence from treating physicians in making his credibility determination, which is contrary to SSR 96-7p and Seventh Circuit case law such as Carradine v. Barnhart, 360 F.3d 751 (7th Cir. 2004).  The Court determined that the ALJ’s credibility finding was erroneous and required reversal.  Mr. Meeks was represented by Frederick J. Daley with assistance from attorney Heather Aloe.

The following article by Mark DeBofsky appeared in the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin‘s Workplace Issues section on March 8, 2005: ERISA ruling sounds warning on nasty tactics . Click on the link to read the article.

posted 3/14/2005


Mark DeBofsky spoke in a program entitled “ERISA made easy” at the ISBA continuing legal education program “What’s New in Labor and Employment Law.”  Mark’s speech at the conference took place on Friday,  March 11, 2005, in Bloomington, Illinois.

On March 10, 2005, Mark DeBofsky spoke at a Morgan Stanley seminar in Schaumburg.

The following article by Mark DeBofsky appeared in the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin‘s Workplace Issues section on February 23, 2005: Chronic pain and disability claims. Click on the link to read the article.

posted 3/4/2005


Boles v. Barnhart, No. 3:03-cv-097 (S.D. IN February 23, 2005). The court concluded that the ALJ inappropriately relied upon the previous ALJ’s decision as well as testimony by a previous VE, which required remand.  Ms. Boles was represented by Frederick J. Daley with help from attorney David A. Bryant and assistance from law student Valerie Garcia.

posted 2/24/2005


Schmidt v. Barnhart, No. 04-cv-4044 (N.D. IL February 4, 2005). The government declined to brief the case, but instead agreed to a voluntary remand.  This occurred after the case had been briefed for district court by Daley, DeBofsky and Bryant.  Mr. Schmidt was represented by Frederick J. Daley with help from attorney David A. Bryant and Barbara Borowski, a law clerk.

The following article by Mark DeBofsky appeared in the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin‘s Workplace Issues section on February 9, 2005: Ruling warns against failure to communicate.

posted 2/11/2005


Kottka v. Barnhart, No. 2:04-cv-0030 (N.D. IN  January 19, 2005). The court remanded this case because the ALJ’s Step Two finding was not supported by substantial evidence, and stated that he should have proceeded to Step Four and Five.  Mr. Kottka was successfully represented by Fred Daley, who was assisted by Suzanne Blaz, a law student

posted 1/31/2005


Hoffman v. Barnhart, No. 02-C-8187 (N.D. IL January 12, 2005). Daley, DeBofsky & Bryant won this case by receiving a remand from District Court Judge Pallmeyer.  Ms. Hoffman was successfully represented by Fred Daley, who was assisted by Heather Aloe

Mullally v. Continental Casualty Co. No. 04-C-412 (N.D. IL January 10, 2005). In this case, Judge Hibbler granted Ms. Mullally’s motion for summary judgment ordering that benefits be paid to a claimant suffering from a left flank chronic pain disorder  following an unjustified benefit denial by Continental.  Ms. Mullally was successfully represented by Jim R. Comerford, who was assisted by Mark D. DeBofsky.

posted 1/19/2005


Jones v. Barnhart, No. 04-C-3532 (N.D. IL January 7, 2005). Daley, DeBofsky & Bryant won this case by receiving a remand from Magistrate Judge Denlow due to the ALJ’s flawed Step Five finding.  Specifically, the VE’s testimony did not demonstrate that he understood the requirements of the jobs, or that Mr. Jones could perform those jobs with his limitationsMr. Jones was successfully represented by Fred Daley, who was assisted by Suzanne Blaz and David A. Bryant

Ciba v. Barnhart, No. 2:02-C-517 (N.D. IN January 7, 2005). Daley, DeBofsky & Bryant won this case by receiving a remand from Judge Andrew Rodovich because the ALJ’s evaluation of the evidence was deficient due to the fact that he did not look at the evidence as a whole, his credibility finding was “critically” flawed, and there were repeated fundamental misunderstandings of opinions and testimony.  Mr. Ciba was successfully represented by Fred Daley, who was assisted by law student Valerie Garcia

Davies v. Barnhart, No. 03-C-7734 (N.D. IL January 3, 2005). Daley, DeBofsky & Bryant won this chronic fatigue syndrome case by receiving a remand from Magistrate Judge Levin due to the ALJ’s flawed credibility, MRFC, and RFC findings.  Specifically, the Court found that it is a bad idea for the ALJ to use a “yawn-o-meter,” which is the fraternal twin of the “sit and squirm” test, faulted the ALJ for a credibility determination which misstated evidence and testimony, and reminds the ALJ to recontact doctors when no treating doctor has submitted an RFC.  Mr. Davies was successfully represented by Fred Daley, who was assisted by Dorie Budlow

posted 1/7/2005


Parris v. Barnhart, No. 03-C-251 (N.D. IL December 28, 2004). The court remanded this case because the ALJ made an erroneous Step Two finding by failing to discuss substantial evidence supporting Ms. Parris’s claim, ignoring evidence from Ms. Parris’s treating doctors, by playing amateur doctor, and by making a credibility finding that was not supported by substantial evidence.  The Court also held that the ALJ’s alternative Step Four finding, which found that Claimant could perform her past work as a health club receptionist, was not supported by substantial evidence because the ALJ did not make an explicit RFC finding.  Ms. Parris was successfully represented by Fred Daley, who was assisted by Dorie Budlow

The following article by Mark DeBofsky appeared in the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin‘s Workplace Issues section on January 3, 2005: Judge takes aim at disability insurers, ERISA. Click on the link to read the article.

posted 1/3/2005


Articles by Mark DeBofsky have recently appeared in the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin’s Workplace Issues section:

December 1, 2004, Fifth Circuit stands alone on degree of disability; and December 20, 2004: 4th Circuit joins chorus in questioning tactics.  Please click on the names to read the articles.

Page v. Barnhart, No. 03-C-50484 (N.D. IL December 7, 2004). The court remanded this case because the ALJ’s RFC and Step Four findings were erroneous and not supported by substantial evidence.  Ms. Page was successfully represented by Fred Daley

posted 12/27/2004


Long v. Barnhart, No. 04-C-2012 (N.D. IL December 6, 2004). The court remanded this case because the ALJ ignored medical evidence and testimony that showed that Mr. Long had significant difficulties in sitting and standing, and because the ALJ wrongly determined his RFC.  Specifically, the court found that the ALJ did not appropriately evaluate the frequency at which Mr. Long could sit and stand, and the ALJ’s RFC finding was not supported by the evidence of record; thus, the court found the ALJ to have played amateur doctor instead of relying on the medical evidence available to him.  Mr. Long was successfully represented by Fred Daley, who was assisted by law student Suzanne Blaz

posted 12/17/2004


Notice: Neither by accessing this site or by reviewing its contents has an attorney-client relationship been formed or established; and nothing contained in this site shall constitute the giving or rendering of legal advice or be construed as a legal opinion, or guarantee of a particular resolution of a legal problem. This information is provided as a public service, and is not intended to be a substitute for competent legal counsel. The information provided is general in nature and may not apply to your circumstances, particularly if you are not in the State of Illinois. Under no circumstances should you make legal decisions solely based upon the information provided on this web site. You should consult an attorney before making any important decision involving a legal matter.
Copyright 2005 Daley, DeBofsky & Bryant.

– See more at: http://www.ddbchicago.com/whats-new/whats-new-archives/2005_3_archive/#sthash.6B2i4ZPF.dpuf