Archives

Archives: 4/19/05 to 6/28/05


The following article by Mark DeBofsky appeared in the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin‘s Workplace Issues section on June 27, 2005: Appeals court rejects ruling on ‘tardy’ review. Click on the link to read the article.

posted 6/28/2005


The following article by Mark DeBofsky appeared in the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin‘s Workplace Issues section on June 20, 2005: 1st Circuit Overlooks Crucial ERISA Distinction. Click on the link to read the article.

Chicago Magazine has released its 2005 list of Super Lawyers in the Chicago area.  Mark DeBofsky was named as a Super Lawyer in the Employment Benefits/ERISA area, and Frederick J. Daley, Jr. was listed as the only Super Lawyer in the Social Security area.

posted 6/21/2005


Martin v. Barnhart, No. 1:03-cv-5823 (N.D. IL May 26, 2005). The court adopted the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (click on link to see it) remanding this case pursuant to sentence four.  The court held that: 1) the ALJ did not  provide sufficient information to Mr. Martin of his right to counsel in order for him to decide intelligently whether to retain counsel; 2) the ALJ failed to follow SSR 02-1p and consider the effects of obesity on Mr. Martin’s degenerative arthritis; and 3) the ALJ failed to consider the entire record in determining Mr. Martin’s credibility and failed to follow SSR 96-7p.  Mr. Martin was represented by Frederick J. Daley.

Guzman v. Barnhart, No. 2:01-cv-384 (N.D. IN June 2, 2005). The court issued an outright reversal of  the ALJ’s decision and awarded benefits.  Specifically, the court found the ALJ erred in denying Plaintiff benefits simply because he had completed a form for unemployment compensation and found that completing unemployment is not evidence of the ability to work.  Mr. Guzman was represented by Frederick J. Daley with assistance from attorney Heather F. Aloe.

On June 3, 2005, Mark DeBofsky spoke at the Ninth International Conference on Post-Polios Health  and Ventilator-Assisted Living about disability claims.

Robinson-Taylor v. Barnhart, No. 04-cv-6580 (N.D. IL May 6, 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.  Ms. Robinson-Taylor was represented by Frederick J. Daley with assistance from attorney Barbara Borowski.

Lawrence v. Barnhart, No. 5:03-cv-241 (E.D. NC May 10, 2005). The court adopted the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation and remanded this case because the ALJ failed to make a credibility finding regarding Ms. Lawrence’s pain contrary to SSR 96-7p, mistated the record, failed to recontact treating doctors, played doctor, and wrongly found Ms. Lawrence capable of performing her past work.  Ms. Lawrence was represented by Frederick J. Daley with assistance from attorney Heather F. Aloe and law clerk Suzanne Blaz.

Delaney v. Barnhart, No. 03-cv-8117 (N.D. IL May 13, 2005). The court remanded this case because the ALJ failed to make an appropriate credibility finding pursuant to SSR 96-7p regarding Mr. Delaney’s headaches and that, as a result, he did not properly incorporate the headaches into the RFC.  Mr. Delaney was represented by Frederick J. Daley.

posted 6/8/2005


The following article by Mark DeBofsky appeared in the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin‘s Workplace Issues section on May 23, 2005: Why Remanding ERISA cases verges on absurd Click on the link to read the article.

On May 23, 2005, Mark DeBofsky spoke in a program entitled “Addressing Malingering, Misrepresentation, and Fraud in a Mental Illness Case” at the American Conference Institute’s “Mental Illness Disability Insurance Claims” conference.

posted 5/25/2005


Jacquez v. Barnhart, No. 04-cv-171 (N.D. IL April 19, 2005). The court adopted the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (click on link to see it) remanding this case pursuant to sentence four.  Specifically, the court found that the ALJ erred in ignoring and rejecting Dr. Kerr’s statement that Mr. Jacquez’s mental impairments met a Listing.  Mr. Jacquez was represented by Marcie Goldbloom.

Santano v. Barnhart, No. 2:04-cv-370 (N.D. IN April 22, 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. Santana was represented by Frederick J. Daley with assistance from attorney Dorie Budlow.

Harris v. Barnhart, No. 03-cv-3185 (N.D. IL April 26, 2005). The court remanded this case because the ALJ failed to make an appropriate credibility finding pursuant to SSR 96-7p, failed to consider evidence of a severe mental impairment, and because the ALJ’s RFC analysis was insufficient.  Mr. Harris was represented by Frederick J. Daley with assistance from attorney Jim Comerford.

posted 5/19/2005


From May 11 to 14, 2005, the annual NOSSCR conference took place in Washington, D.C.

Frederick J. Daley and Heather F. Aloe spoke in a program entitled, Common mistakes that can jeopardize an appeal. Please click here for the power point presentation slides.

Heather F. Aloe also spoke with Dr. Julian Freeman in a speech entitled, From the horse’s mouth: recognizing when Listings for disorders of the spine and colitis and arthritis are met and cross-examining Medical Experts.

David A. Bryant spoke with another attorney about Marketing.

White v. Barnhart, No. 04-cv-4959 (N.D. IL March 31, 2005). The court issued an outright reversal of  the ALJ’s decision and awarded benefits.  Specifically, the court found the ALJ to have failed to follow the law of the case, and determined there to be enough evidence after 12 years of litigation to award Mr. White benefits.  Mr. White was represented by Marcie E. Goldbloom.

Moore v. Barnhart, No. 03-cv-0956 (E.D. WI March 31, 2005). The court remanded this case because the ALJ failed to make appropriate Step Four and credibility findings.  Mr. Moore was represented by Frederick J. Daley with assistance from law clerk Valerie Garcia.

posted 5/17/2005


The following article by Mark DeBofsky appeared in the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin‘s Workplace Issues section on May 2, 2005: Changed Definition Halts Disability BenefitsClick on the link to read the article.

posted 5/3/2005


The followingarticle by Mark DeBofsky appeared in the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin‘s Workplace Issues section on April 18, 2005: Deferential, yes, but certainly not inconsequential Click on the link to read the article.

Martin v. Barnhart, No. 04-cv-2704 (N.D. CA March 17, 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.   Ms. Martin was represented by Frederick J. Daley with assistance from attorney Heather F. Aloe.

posted 4/19/2005


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_6_archive/#sthash.3q0Ex0Hi.dpuf