Archive for the ‘Social Security Disability Information’ Category
There is an abundance of evidence, that happiness is the most important factor in determining your physical well being. Here is a little something that can’t help but brighten your day.
With the recent US Supreme Court decision regarding the Affordable Care Act, employers should review what their obligations are to assist in providing health care plans.
Here is a great pictorial view of their obligations.
As most applicants know, it can take several years to have your Disability claim awarded. Unfortunately, some clients think that their disability attorney is not doing everything possible to move things along. Nothing could be further from the truth. I recently came across a post that does an excellent job explaining that your attorney really does care about your claim.
For more information on the Disability process, please contact our office at: OhioSocialSecurityAttorney.net
Harry Bernstein – Attorney
50 Public Square – Suite 801
Cleveland, OH 44113
Applicants who are denied SSI benefits can appeal that decision, P.2
In the last post, this blog began a discussion of the complex appeals process that is available for people who are initially denied Supplemental Security Income benefits from the Social Security Administration. Much like the Social Security Disability Insurance benefits program, many applicants for benefits through the SSI program are denied at the initial determination of eligibility stage. Applicants for benefits through either program can appeal that initial denial of SSA benefits.
In the last post, this blog left off with the administrative law judge hearing stage of an SSI appeal. If the ALJ issues an applicant an adverse decision regarding SSI benefits, the applicant can take the appeal to the next level, which is before the Social Security Appeals Council.
The Social Security’s Appeals Council looks at all requests for review, however, the Appeals Council can deny a request for review. If a review is denied at the Appeals Council stage, the applicant will receive a letter explaining why the review has been denied. If the council declines to review the case, the applicant can take that decision to federal court for review.
If the Appeals Council accepts review, the review can take different forms. The council itself can look at the case and issue its decision, or the council can return the case to an administrative law judge for further consideration. Adverse decision at the Appeals Council stage of the appeal can be taken to federal court. Again, the process can take different turns in federal court.
The federal court judge can grant SSI benefits after the district court proceeding. However, the judge can remand the file back to an SSA ALJ or the Appeals Council for further consideration, or deny benefits at the federal court stage of the review.
Many applicants find the help of an experienced Florida Social Security Disability and Supplemental Security Income lawyer valuable when seeking SSA benefits. A seasoned Social Security attorney can help an applicant in assessing an individual situation and can help an applicant navigate through the complex SSA process.
Source: Social Security Administration, “Your Right To Question A Decision Made On Your Supplemental Security Income (SSI) Claim,” Jan. 2011
Sent from Feeddler RSS Reader
Severe Impairment in Social Security Disability Cases – Parker-Grose v. Astrue
One of a handful of factors that the SSA and reviewing judges consider in determining whether a claimant is eligible for Social Security disability benefits is whether the claimant’s impairment(s) is sufficiently severe. In Parker-Grose v. Astrue, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals explains some of the evidence that can be used to meet this requirement.
Plaintiff Mary Jane Parker-Grose filed a claim for Social Security disability benefits, asserting that she’s unable to work due to depression. The Social Security Administration (SSA) initially denied the claim and, following an administrative hearing, an SSA Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) found that Plaintiff was not disabled for purposes of obtaining disability benefits. Specifically, the judge determined that Plaintiff’s depression is not sufficiently severe.
In order to find a claimant eligible for Social Security benefits, the SSA or a reviewing judge must find that the claimant suffers from one or more severe impairments. An impairment is severe if it “significantly limits the claimant’s ability to do basic work activities.” The SSA advises claimants “[i]f you do not have any impairment or combination of impairments which significantly limits your physical or mental ability to do basic work activities, we will find that you do not have a severe impairment and are, therefore, not disabled.” An ALJ considering the severity of a claimant’s impairment must make this decision based on substantial evidence.
In this case, the Second Circuit – which sits in New York City and whose jurisdiction covers New York state, Connecticut and Vermont – reversed the ALJ’s decision and remanded the case for further proceedings, ruling that the ALJ’s finding that Plaintiff’s depression is “nonsevere” was not supported by substantial evidence. In so doing, the court noted that the severity requirement is a “de minimis” one aimed at weeding out claims in which a claimant suffers from only minimal impairment.
According to the court, two treating psychologists – Dr. Joseph M. Patalano and Dr. Richard Root II – examined Plaintiff and determined that she suffers from depression. Furthermore, Dr. Root estimated Plaintiff’s “Global Assessment of Functioning” (GAF) score – an assessment of a patient’s overall level of functioning – to be in the range of persons experiencing “moderate symptoms” including “moderate difficulty in school, work, [and] social functioning.” These opinions, the court ruled, proved that Plaintiff’s depression was sufficiently severe.
Legal Boot camp challenges law students
January 13, 2012
Carol J. Schlueter
The spring semester got an early — and intensive — start for 150 second- and third-year students at Tulane Law School this week. They jumped into their future careers with a legal-skills boot camp presented by practicing attorneys and judges.
Attorneys Rico Alvendia, left, and Robert Redfearn Jr. coach law students about depositions during the boot camp. (Photos by Paula Burch-Celentano)
The week-long optional intersession program, first ever at the law school and many months in planning, opened on Monday (Jan. 9) at Weinmann Hall. Three tracks are being offered, each carrying two credits, in pretrial civil litigation, pretrial criminal litigation and transactional law.
“In the complex and competitive environment of modern law practice, the need for comprehensive skills training has never been greater,” says David D. Meyer, dean and Mitchell Franklin Professor of Law. “Over the course of one fast-paced, hard-driving week, leading lawyers from around the country are putting students through the paces of representing a client in an unfolding lawsuit or business deal.”
Second-year law student Amy Mandel practices taking a deposition.
Importantly, students are learning by doing — interviewing a client, evaluating a case, drafting a pleading or agreement — all with the critical guidance of nearly 75 legal practitioners, many of them Tulane alumni.
Each afternoon concludes with a panel discussion of issues not generally addressed in the standard law school curriculum, including: “Communicating With Clients and What Clients Want to Know,” “How to be a Star Associate,” “Relationships With Opposing Counsel” and “What Judges Do and Do Not Want.”
“We expect that employers will recognize the strong value of this program, and that it will cement Tulane’s reputation as a singularly well-rounded law school where students grapple with both legal theory and practice at a highly sophisticated level,” Meyer said.