Archives

Archives: 12/1/08 to 3/24/09


The following article by Mark DeBofsky appeared in the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin’s Workplace Issues section on March 23, 2009: Ruling shows courts must take more responsibility.Click on the link to read the article.

Richardson v. Astrue, No. 08-cv-142 (S.D. Ill. Mar. 23, 2009). The District Court issued a remand in this case because the ALJ failed to discuss or weigh the findings of therapist Miller or his functional assessment report, the Court found the ALJ’s credibility determination “troubling,” failing to make a proper determination and consider all the factors as required by SSR 96-7p and the ALJ’s hypotheticals and RFC finding failed to adequately reflect the evidence supporting the findings of moderate limitations in the areas of concentration, persistence and pace and social functioning. Ms. Richardson was represented by Frederick J. Daley, Jr. with assistance from Suzanne Blaz.

POSTED 3/24/2009


Mark DeBofsky was nominated as a finalist for LexisNexis’ Insurance Law Center Policyholder Attorney of the Year award.  Mark was the only attorney from Chicago nominated.

Mark DeBofsky was one of the presenters talking about, “Mediation Skills and Strategies” at the 12th Annual  Labor & Employment Law Update held in the USB Tower in Chicago, Illinois, on March 20, 2009 and at the Hilton Garden Inn in Champaign, Illinois on March 25, 2009.

Davis v. Astrue, No. 08-cv-133 (N.D. Ind. Mar. 12, 2009). The government agreed to a voluntary remand after the case had been briefed by Daley, DeBofsky and Bryant.  Ms. Davis was represented by Marcie E. Goldbloom with assistance from Suzanne Blaz.

POSTED 3/20/2009


Leger v. Tribune Company Long Term Disability Benefit Plan, 2009 U.S.App.LEXIS 5108 (7th Cir. March 9, 2009). The Seventh Circuit remanded this case for further proceedings.  Plaintiff was represented by Mark DeBofsky.

The following article by Mark DeBofsky appeared in the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin’sWorkplace Issues sectionon March 16, 2009: Ruling exposes defects in insurer’s determinationClick on the link to read the article.

POSTED 3/16/2009


McKinney v. Astrue, No. 08-cv-309 (E.D. Ken. Mar. 11, 2009). 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. McKinney was represented by Frederick J. Daley with assistance from Kate Hoppe.

Guerrero v. Astrue, No. 07-cv-2246 (D. Hi. Mar. 10, 2009). The District Court adopted the MJ’s Report & Recommendation and issued a remand in this case.  Ms. Guerrero was represented by Frederick J. Daley, Jr. with assistance from Kimberly Jones.

Minyard v. Astrue, No. 08-cv-2023 (N.D. Ga. Mar. 10, 2009). 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. Minyard was represented by Marcie E. Goldbloom with assistance from Suzanne Blaz

Anderson v. Astrue, No. 08-cv-613 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 10, 2009). The District Court issued a remand in this case because the ALJ failed to explore Mr. Anderson’s reasons for not pursuing certain treatment, as required by SSR 96-7p, preferring to make inappropriate inferences, wrongly found that Plaintiff’s ability to read and use a computer undermined his medication side-effects, and improperly rejected the credibility of Mr. Anderson’s wife.  Additionally, the hypotheticals failed to account for some o the ALJ’s own RFC findings as well as Mr. Anderson’s pain and medication side-effects.  Mr. Anderson was represented by Frederick J. Daley, Jr. with assistance from Kimberly Jones.

Huber v. Astrue, No. 07-cv-2246 (C.D. Ill. Mar. 3, 2009). The District Court adopted the Magistrate Judge’s Report & Recommendation and issued a remand in this case.  Ms. Huber was represented by Frederick J. Daley, Jr. with assistance from Suzanne Blaz.

The following article by Mark DeBofsky appeared in the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin’sWorkplace Issues section on March 2, 2009: Consider this before wrongfully denying a claim.Click on the link to read the article.

Winston v. Astrue, No. 08-cv-126 (N.D. Ind. Feb. 26, 2009). The District Court issued a remand in this case because the ALJ improperly dismissed the treating physician opinion as inconsistent when his opinion was consistent with someone with a bipolar condition, who had both good and bad days, resulting in an incomplete RFC and hypotheticals.  Mr. Winston was represented by Frederick J. Daley, Jr. with assistance from Suzanne Blaz.

Irvine v. Astrue, No. 07-cv-50250 (N.D. Ill. Feb. 26, 2009). The District Court issued a remand in this case.  Mr. Irvine was represented by Frederick J. Daley, Jr. with assistance from Suzanne Blaz.

Frederick J. Daley presented a seminar with former VE Kathryn Heatherly called, “Building a Winning Hypothetical: Getting the Most From VE testimony,” at the Spring 2009 NADR conference held in Baltimore, MD. For more information, click here.

POSTED  3/11/2009


Spencer v. Astrue, No. 07-cv-4641 (N.D. Ill. Feb. 12, 2009). The District Court issued a remand in this case because the ALJ made his own physical RFC assessment, splitting the difference between the State agency RFC and Plaintiff’s testimony.  Ms. Spencer was represented by Marcie E. Goldbloom with assistance from Suzanne Blaz.

Frederick J. Daley and Marcie E. Goldbloom presented a seminar, “Succeed at the Administrative Law Judge Hearing” covering a variety of topics to help others gain the skills you need to handle Social Security Disability Cases in Oak Brook, Illinois on February 17, 2009, and in Chicago, Illinois on February 18, 2009.

POSTED 2/17/2009


The following article by Mark DeBofsky appeared in the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin’sWorkplace Issues section on February 2, 2009: Court right to look at big picture in benefits case.Click on the link to read the article.

Mark DeBofsky and Sandra Dye were named in the Illinois Super Lawyers 2009. Mr. DeBofsky was named a Super Lawyer in Employee Benefits/ERISA and was listed in the top 100 lawyers.  Ms. Dye was named an Illinois Rising Star in the Social Security Disability field.

POSTED 2/3/2009


The following article by Mark DeBofsky appeared in the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin’s Workplace Issues section on January 19, 2009: Ruling outlines scope of review in ERISA case.Click on the link to read the article.

POSTED 1/23/2009


The following article by Mark DeBofsky appeared in the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin’s Workplace Issues section on December 29, 2008: Ruling puts Glenn decision to work.Click on the link to read the article.

POSTED 12/30/2008


Hemminger v. Astrue, No. 08-cv-186 (W.D. Wisc. Dec. 16, 2008). The District Court issued a remand in this case because the ALJ failed to call a vocational expert to testify regarding the occupational impact of the requirement that Plaintiff be allowed to change position from sitting to standing every half an hour, and instead reached her  conclusion at Step Five based upon the Medical-Vocational Guidelines; improperly relied on notations that Plaintiff’s condition was stable to discredit her treating doctor’s opinion and Plaintiff’s testimony; erroneously misconstrues Plaintiff’s doctors’ recommendations that she do some walking against her;  inappropriately held the lack of further treatment other than medication against Plaintiff when Plaintiff testified that her doctor indicated there was nothing more that could be done, inappropriately playing doctor; failed to build a logical bridge from the evidence to her credibility conclusions; misconstrued the Medical Expert’s testimony regarding Plaintiff’s mental limitations; and failed to properly consider the effect of her combination of impairments on her ability to work.  Ms. Hemminger was represented by Frederick J. Daley, Jr. with assistance from Suzanne Blaz.

Sassan v. Astrue, No. 08-cv-120 (E.D. Mich. Dec. 15, 2008). The District Court issued an order adopting the Magistrate Judge’s Report & Recommendation to remand this case because the ALJ failed to address Plaintiff’s undisputed limitations in neck flexion and pushing and pulling and misinterpreted treating evidence in this regard, resulting in an erroneous RFC determination and erroneous hypotheticals  to the VE.  Ms. Sassan was represented by Frederick J. Daley, Jr. with assistance from Marcie Goldbloom and Kate Hoppe. posted 12/16/2008>

Speer-Cihlar v. Astrue, No. 08-cv-911 (N.D. Ill. Dec. 12, 2008). The District Court issued a remand in this case because the ALJ repeatedly failed to build a bridge from the evidence to his conclusions, disregarding nearly all of the medical professional opinions of record, and failed to indicate his rationale made meaningful review impossible and which resulted in an incomplete RFC determination and erroneous hypotheticals.  Additionally, the ALJ ignored evidence from Plaintiff’s treating doctor and improperly misconstrued Plaintiff’s minimal activities against her.  Ms. Speer-Cihlar was represented by Frederick J. Daley, Jr. with assistance from Suzanne Blaz. posted 12/16/2008

The following article by Mark DeBofsky appeared in the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin’s Workplace Issues section on December 15, 2008: Insurer functioned as administrator: court.Click on the link to read the article.  posted 12/16/2008

Brown v. Astrue, No. 08-cv-2052 (N.D. Ill. Dec. 11, 2008). 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. Brown was represented by Frederick J. Daley with assistance from Kim Jones.

POSTED 12/16/2008


The following article by Mark DeBofsky appeared in the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin’s Workplace Issues section on December 1, 2008: Ruling an indictment of Unum’s operations.Click on the link to read the article.

Hennessy v. Astrue, No. 07-cv-6923 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 21, 2008). The District Court issued a remand in this case because the ALJ: erred in rejecting the treating doctor’s 2007 opinion because there was no contradictory opinion and based upon his own lay opinion, noting that an consultative examination from 2 years prior to the opinion cannot invalidate it; and did not provide an articulated credibility determination, failed to consider objective evidence supporting Plaintiff’s allegations and relied on mere speculation.  Mr. Hennessy was represented by Frederick J. Daley, Jr. with assistance from Kate Hoppe and Suzanne Blaz.

Kubiak v. Astrue, No. 08-cv-1108 (W.D. Ten. Nov. 28, 2008). 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. Kubiak was represented by Marcie E. Goldbloom with assistance from Kate Hoppe.

Allen v. Astrue, No. 08-cv-2127 (C.D. Ill. Nov. 19, 2008). 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. Allen was represented by Frederick J. Daley, Jr. with assistance from Suzanne Blaz.

The following article by Mark DeBofsky appeared in the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin’s Workplace Issues section on November 24, 2008: An end to lenient regime of claim reviews.Click on the link to read the article.

– See more at: http://www.ddbchicago.com/whats-new/whats-new-archives/archive-12-2008/#sthash.d3ouyqFQ.dpuf