1. Murray v. Astrue, Northern District of New York, January 11, 2010 (Order to Remand).
The matter was remanded for further administrative action on the issue of the plaintiff’s disability. The Administrative Law Judge had incorrectly determined that the plaintiff was not disabled. Upon remand the Administrative Law Judge was directed to issue a partially favorable decision finding the plaintiff disabled. The plaintiff was represented by Jaya Shurtliff.
 2. Buske v. Astrue, Northern District of New York, November 5, 2009 (Order to Remand).
A stipulated remand was ordered due to the Administrative Law Judge failing to consider all medical evidence in determining whether the plaintiff’s impairments are severe, failing to obtain a consultative examination to assist with evaluating the plaintiff’s impairments and failing to obtain vocational testimony. Thus, the case was returned for further development. Howard Olinsky represented the plaintiff with Jaya Shurtliff assisting on the brief.
3. Burgin v. Astrue, 2009 U.S. App. Lexis 22137, 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, October 8, 2009.
The Court found that the Administrative Law Judge failed to consider the combination of impairments and there affect on the claimant’s social function, concentration, persistence, or pace, all of which were important factors in determining whether the claimant could have engaged in substantial gainful activity. The matter was remanded to the district court with instructions to remand to the Commissioner for further proceeding. Howard D. Olinsky appeared for Plaintiff with Jaya Shurtliff assisting on the brief.
4. Serianni v. Astrue, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17758, Northern District of New York, March 1, 2010.
The United States District Judge reversed and remanded the Plaintiff’s case. The court found that the residual functional capacity determination was not supported by substantial evidence. The Administrative Law Judge failed to properly apply the treating physician rule and thus the case was in need of further review. Jaya Shurtliff represented the Plaintiff.
5. Chavis v. Astrue, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 125144, Northern District of New York, February 18, 2010.
The matter was remanded due to the Court not being able to determine whether the Administrative Law Judge appropriately relied on the Medical-Vocational Grids in finding the Plaintiff not disabled and the treating physician analysis by the ALJ being flawed. Thus, the administrative law judge was directed to reevaluate the Plaintiff’s disabilities. Jaya Shurtliff represented the Plaintiff.
6. Hunt v. Astrue, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 117620, Northern District of New York, December 16, 2009
The United States District Judge found the Administrative Law Judged erred in failing to grant weight to the medical opinions, in failing to fully develop the record, and in analyzing the Plaintiff’s credibility. Thus, the case was remanded for further proceedings. Jaya Shurtliff represented the Plaintiff.
7. Fisher v. Astrue, Slip Copy, 2008 WL 630476, Northern District of New York, March 5, 2008.
The claimant's motion for judgment on the pleadings was granted, the Commissioner's finding of disability was vacated, and the matter was remanded to the agency for further consideration. The court held, "the ALJ's determination is devoid of any meaningful analysis and discussion of the factors which he was obliged to consider [in evaluating the claimant’s testimony], and provides no enlightenment as to the basis for his rejection of those complaints which could then be tested against the record evidence." Howard Olinsky argued the case, Jaya Shurtliff assisted on the Brief.
8. Brodbeck v. Astrue, Slip Copy, 2008 WL 681905, Northern District of New York, March 7, 2008.
The US District Court Judge rejected the government’s objection to findings in favor of the claimant made by a Magistrate Judge. The case was remanded for a new hearing in part for clarification of the claimant’s residual functional capacity and for "a reasonable explanation regarding conflicts between the vocational expert testimony and the Dictionary of Occupational Titles." The claimant was represented by Jaya Shurtliff.
9. Allen v. Astrue, Slip Copy, 2008 WL 660510, Northern District of New York, March 10, 2008.
A US Magistrate Judge recommended the denial of claimant’s benefits be affirmed. Claimant objected to the Magistrates recommended decision and argued before the Federal District Court Judge. The District Judge rejected the part of the Magistrate’s recommendation that found the ALJ properly evaluated the medical opinions of the plaintiff's therapist and the ALJ properly evaluated the claimant’s credibility. The case was remanded for a new hearing. Howard Olinsky argued with Jaya Shurtliff on the Brief.
10. Caruso v. Astrue, 2008 WL 1995119, Northern District of New York, May 6, 2008.
The Federal Court NDNY awarded the claimant a new hearing because the ALJ "not only failed to address the weight of the treating source, but there is no mention of any weight given to any medical opinion," there was conflict between the vocational expert’s testimony about jobs the claimant could do and what the jobs require according to the Dictionary of Occupational Titles, and the ALJ did not properly evaluate the claimant’s reports of pain and other symptoms. Howard Olinsky argued with Jaya Shurtliff on the Brief
11. Crysler v. Astrue, 563 F.Supp.2d 418, Northern District of New York. June 27, 2008.
The claimant, who suffers from Fibromyalgia, was unrepresented at her hearing, but after retaining Olinsky & Shurtliff and appealing to federal court, won remand for a new hearing. The court found in her favor and agreed with the arguments briefed by Jaya Shurtliff that the Administrative Law Judge failed to appropriately consider the treating physician’s and a nurse practitioner’s opinion, the Residual Functional Capacity determination was made without proper analysis and the ALJ did not consider the extent of the claimant’s pain.
12. Pettey v. Astrue, 582 F.Supp.2d 434 W.D.N.Y., October 15, 2008, United States District Court, Western District of New York.
The Federal Court, Western District of New York remanded Ms. Pettey's claim for further development. The Court held that the ALJ failed to adequately develop record of medical evidence at administrative hearing and that this was legal error. The claimant won a new hearing so that treatment notes and other relevant evidence could be submitted to support her claim. Howard Olinsky argued the case with Jaya Shurtliff on the brief.
13. Morseman v. Astrue, 571 F.Supp.2d 390, 136 Soc.Sec.Rep.Serv. 65, Western District of New York, July 22, 2008.
The Federal Court Western District of New York remanded for payment of benefits without need for a new hearing. The Court found that the ALJ failed to apply the appropriate legal standards, improperly discounted claimant’s testimony, improperly substituted his own judgment regarding medical issues, and failed to follow the Second Circuit's treating physician rule. The court found these "arguments to be meritorious on each of these accounts." Jaya Shurtliff argued the case and wrote the brief.
14. Barbera v. Barnhart, 151 Fed.Appx. 31, 2005 WL 2460700 (C.A.2 (N.Y.)) United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit, October 4, 2005.
The claimant won remand from the Court of Appeals 2nd Cir. The Court held that an administrative law judge may not disregard or decline to address a treating physician's medical opinion in a disability benefits case on the grounds that the information provided is incomplete, without first attempting to obtain the missing information. Howard Olinsky argued the case, Jaya Shurtliff assisted on the brief.
|
Navigation Menu
Case Summaries
