Category: Social Security Federal Appeals
-
Why “Occasional” Contact Did Not Resolve a “Superficial” Interaction Limit
An Ohio federal court held that limiting how often a claimant interacts with others does not necessarily address how demanding those interactions may be. Because the ALJ did not explain the omitted restriction or test it with the vocational expert, the case returned for further proceedings.
-
When Vocational Testimony Skips the Overhead-Reaching Conflict
A North Carolina federal court ordered further proceedings after the ALJ failed to identify and resolve an apparent conflict between an overhead-reaching restriction and jobs requiring frequent reaching.
-
What a Sentence-Four Remand Means in an SSDI Appeal
Whitt v. Bisignano shows how a sentence-four remand sends an SSDI claim back for additional ALJ review without deciding benefits.
-
SSI Appeals: Why Medical Opinion Evidence Needs a Clear Explanation
A Maryland federal court remanded an SSI denial because the ALJ did not adequately explain the evaluation of a counselor’s report.
Feden Law Group
For the sick, injured, and disabled.
And guidance for everyone else.
(267) 234-7465
Fax: (215) 258-9861
nfeden@fedenlawgroup.com
711 West Ave., Jenkintown, PA 19046
This website provides general information, not legal advice. Contacting the firm does not create an attorney-client relationship. Representation begins only after a written agreement. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.