Toll-Free: (888) 234-5758
Phone: (954) 523-3870
DISCLAIMER: Please note that every case is different and these verdicts and settlements, while accurate, do not represent what we may obtain for you in your case.
Disabilities: Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), Oppositional Defiant Disorder, and a Learning Disability
Notice of Decision: Fully Favorable
Administrative Law Judge: Thomas W. Snook
Office of Disability Adjudication & Review (ODAR): Miami-Dade & Monroe County, Florida (including the Florida Keys (Key West)).
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
After careful consideration of the entire record, I make the following findings:
1. The claimant's date last insured is June 30, 2009.
2. The claimant has not engaged in substantial gainful activity since April 1, 2005, the amended alleged onset date (20 CFR 404.1520(b), 404.1571 et seq., 416.920(b) and 416.971 et seq.).
3. The claimant has the following severe impairments: lumbar disc disease and morbid obesity (20 CFR 404.1520(c) and 416.920(c)).
4. The claimant does not have an impairment or combination of impairments that meets or medically equals 1.04 or any of the other listed impairments in 20 CFR Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1 (20 CFR 404.1520(d) and 416.920(d)).
5. After careful consideration of the entire record, I find that the claimant has the residual functional capacity to perform significantly less than a full range of sedentary work as defined in 20 CFR 404.1567(a) and 416.967(a) on a regular and sustained basis.
In making this finding, I considered all symptoms and the extent to which these symptoms can reasonably be accepted as consistent with the objective medical evidence and other evidence, based on the requirements of 20 CFR 404.1529 and 416.929 and SSRs 96-4p and 96~7p. I have also considered opinion evidence in accordance with the requirements of20 CFR 404.1527 and 416.927 and SSRs 96-2p, 96-5p, 96-6p and 06-3p. In this regard, I give the greatest weight to the testimony of the medical expert at the hearing, Dr. Peter Schosheim, MD, as he is a board-certified orthopedic surgeon, and his testimony is well supported by the record as a whole, including an April 2005 MRI and the most recent 2008 treatment notes from North Shore Medical Center. As noted by Dr. Schosheim, this evidence was either not properly considered or not available at the time previous assessments were completed indicating that the claimant could perform sedentary or light work.
6. The claimant is unable to perform any past relevant work (20 CFR 404.1565 and 416.965).
The demands of the claimant's past relevant work exceed the residual functional capacity.
7. The claimant was a younger individual age 18-44 on the established disability onset date (20 CFR 404.1563 and 416.963).
Continue to next page
Return to Case Results
Contact us for a FREE evaluation of your case
*The Law Office of LaVan & Neidenberg represents disabled people across the nation. Our firm advertises on television in: Miami-Dade County, Florida; Broward County, Florida; Palm Beach County, Florida; Fulton County, Georgia; and DeKalb County, Georgia. Click here to watch a television commercial.
Awarded: Confidential