BLOG

If you litigate Social Security Disability (SSD) cases in the Fourth Circuit, Hultz v. Bisignano  is a decision you’ll want to keep close. This case builds on Arakas v. Commissioner  and provides a strong reminder, and a warning, about how fibromyalgia claims must be properly evaluated. Hultz Reinforces Arakas: No Objective Evidence Requirement for Fibromyalgia The core error in Hultz  involved the ALJ denying benefits by discounting subjective symptoms simply because they we

A Case That Shouldn’t Have Gone This Far It took a trip all the way to the Ninth Circuit to clarify something fundamental: Step Two of the Social Security disability process is a minimal threshold , not a high bar. Fortunately, Josephine Gerrard  stepped in and delivered an outstanding oral argument on behalf of her client, Combest , leading to a much-needed remand . Background on the Claimant Combest  suffers from the following medically documented impairments : Fibromyalgia

Every so often, a Social Security case reads less like routine administrative law and more like a cautionary tale about delay, broken process, and institutional fatigue. Hicks v. Commissioner , a decision issued by the Sixth Circuit , is one of those cases. Background: The Hicks Case Hicks was awarded Supplemental Security Income (SSI)  in 2008. Her case was later entangled in the Eric Conn / ALJ Daugherty fraud scandal , despite her having no involvement  in the misconduct.

As the holiday season wraps up and the New Year approaches, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit  quietly issued a decision that Social Security disability practitioners  should not overlook: Nunez v. Commissioner of Social Security . This decision reinforces a critical point in Residual Functional Capacity (RFC)  analysis: there must be a clear connection between acknowledged mental limitations and the actual functional limitations reflected in the RFC. Key Issue

A recent Ninth Circuit decision — Romero v. Bisignano  (Nov. 12, 2025)  — provides a timely reminder that reasoning-level conflicts between a claimant’s RFC and jobs identified at Step Five cannot be ignored . For Social Security Disability attorneys, especially those practicing in the Ninth Circuit, this case underscores two critical points: Reasoning levels still matter . ALJs must explicitly reconcile conflicts  on the record. What Happened in Romero v. Bisignano ? In Rome

When an ALJ acknowledges “moderate limitations”  in areas like attention and attendance, but then crafts an RFC with no actual restrictions on staying on task or consistent attendance , the Second Circuit isn’t buying it. This decision is a must-read for anyone handling mental-health disability claims. ⚖️ The Big Picture In Nunez , the Second Circuit vacated the denial of benefits  because the ALJ’s RFC failed to translate recognized limitations into meaningful functional res

You know who gets genuinely excited about a good transferable skills analysis? This girl right here. And let me tell you, I've got a fresh-off-the-press Tenth Circuit remand that deserves a permanent spot in your Social Security litigation toolkit. The Case: Morgan v. Commissioner, SSA , No. 24-8085 (10th Cir. Oct. 9, 2025) Meet Rose Morgan. She spent 14 years as a buyer for the Wyoming Department of Transportation—not exactly a walk in the park. Her job involved soliciting b

Every so often, the Ninth Circuit drops a decision that brings home the realities of Social Security disability litigation— Phillips v. Bisignano  is one of those. Key Takeaways: What You Need to Know Phillips asked the ALJ to reopen  a prior application. But without a solid due process  argument or “good cause” under § 404.911(b) , the Ninth Circuit rejected the request. The ALJ discounted multiple medical opinions (from Eastman, Wingate, Jaura, Fernandez, Marshall) because

When it comes to children applying for SSI (Supplemental Security Income) benefits, the Social Security Administration’s (SSA) Listing of Impairments  (20 C.F.R. Pt. 404, Subpt. P, Appx. 1) is often the first and most critical checkpoint. But what happens when a child’s condition doesn’t neatly meet those listing criteria? The 2013 Ninth Circuit case Mattison ex rel. K.A. v. Astrue  offers important lessons on how SSA evaluates childhood disability — and how attorneys should

It’s that time of year when few court decisions are issued, the quiet stretch after the holidays. Yet, on December 26, 2019 , the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals  released an important ruling in Zuniga v. Commissioner of Social Security , a case that continues to shape how Social Security disability appeals are reviewed. Let’s break it down. 👇 Background of the Case Zuniga appealed the denial of her Social Security disability benefits  after two remands from the district cour

The Ninth Circuit’s decision in Putz v. Bisignano  (October 28, 2025) doesn’t change the law—but it reinforces what the court continues to expect when reviewing ALJ reasoning in Social Security disability cases. Case Background The claimant, Putz, appealed the denial of disability benefits. Both the district court and the Ninth Circuit affirmed the ALJ’s decision.The familiar issues included: Evaluation of medical opinions Symptom testimony Lay witness statements Residual Fun

In Arce v. Commissioner , the Eleventh Circuit addressed an important issue regarding the assessment of a claimant’s Residual Functional Capacity (RFC) in Social Security disability cases. Ivette Arce appealed the denial of her disability claim, arguing that the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) failed to properly consider her non-severe mental limitations when determining her RFC. RFC Assessment and Non-Severe Mental Limitations The Eleventh Circuit emphasized that an ALJ must

On December 28, 2023, the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court’s decision in Ohneck v. Commissioner of Social Security . This case provides key insight into how appellate courts evaluate treating physicians’ opinions and the preservation of issues on appeal. ⚖️ Preservation of Arguments on Appeal Ohneck argued that she had properly preserved her challenges regarding the Administrative Law Judge’s (ALJ) evaluation of her treating physician’s opinion. She claimed she wa

In Espinoza v. Commissioner of Social Security  (April 16, 2024), the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed a denial of Social Security disability benefits. Ms. Espinoza had appealed after the Social Security Appeals Council refused her request for review. The district court upheld the Commissioner’s decision, prompting her appeal to the Tenth Circuit. Key Facts: The case focused on whether the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) applied proper legal standards. The Tenth Circuit

The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals issued an affirmance in Harrison v. Commissioner of Social Security  on April 29, 2024. This case illustrates how courts review Social Security disability determinations under the substantial evidence standard. Case Overview Ms. Harrison applied for Supplemental Security Income (SSI) on February 23, 2018. After initial and reconsideration denials, she appeared before an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ). Despite her diagnoses—including ADHD, de

The Ninth Circuit recently affirmed the denial of disability benefits in Blanchard v. Bisignano , providing a helpful refresher on how courts evaluate subjective symptom testimony, conflicting medical opinions, and vocational expert (VE) evidence under the substantial evidence standard. Overview of the Case Blanchard alleged disabling physical and cognitive limitations following a car accident. The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) was not fully persuaded—and the Ninth Circuit a

Before diving into the details, a quick shout-out to Jennifer Van Fossan and Dennis Fox for their excellent work on Littrell v. O'Malley , issued on October 4, 2024. This case brought an interesting split in the Eighth Circuit — complete with a dissenting opinion! Background of the Case Littrell appealed the denial of her Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits. Her main argument? The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) didn’t properly consider her chronic back and knee pain.

The Ninth Circuit has once again clarified an essential principle in disability law: Administrative Law Judges (ALJs) must explain their changes in findings. In Gageby v. Dudek, the Court reversed and remanded after an ALJ downgraded a claimant’s concentration, persistence, and pace (CPP) rating without any explanation. Case Background: What Happened The ALJ initially found moderate CPP limitations. After the district court remanded the case to consider Dr. Campion’s opinion,

Another day, another uphill climb for Social Security disability claimants. The Tenth Circuit recently issued another affirmance — this time in Fager v. Commissioner of Social Security , upholding the denial of SSI benefits. The opinion runs 21 pages, so let’s break down the key takeaways. Background Fager, a former legal secretary and housekeeper with a degree in anthropology, applied for Supplemental Security Income (SSI) in 2017. She alleged disability due to: Back injurie

Swanson applied for disability insurance benefits alleging chronic pain and mobility problems. The case had already been remanded once....