disability benefits
Man entitled to benefits for injuries sustained on the job
April 26, 2013
Jennifer NelsonFinding that a construction supervisor’s receipt of unemployment benefits didn’t preclude him from eligibility
for temporary total disability benefits, the Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed a total award of more than $61,000 to the injured
worker.
MoreGE did not discriminate against employee
April 16, 2013
Jennifer NelsonA longtime employee at the Bloomington General Electric Co. plant could not prove to the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals that
the company discriminated against her because of a disability and retaliated against her when she filed a complaint with the
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
More7th Circuit orders SSA take another look at woman’s case
January 18, 2013
Jennifer NelsonFinding that the administrative law judge hearing a southern Indiana woman’s claim for disability insurance benefits
made several errors in his consideration of the record, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals sent the case back to the Social
Security Administration for more proceedings.
MorePrevious back problems not enough to disqualify public employee from disability benefits
January 2, 2013
Marilyn OdendahlAlthough an employee had a pre-existing condition, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled his on-duty injury qualified him for
Class 1 impairment disability benefits from the Indiana Public Employee Retirement Fund.
MoreDivided appeals court affirms denial of incapacity maintenance
December 14, 2012
Dave StaffordA woman with longstanding disabilities denied incapacity maintenance in her divorce judgment convinced one appellate judge
that the trial court abused its discretion, but the majority affirmed the lower court’s decision.
MoreJudges order Social Security Administration to take another look at man’s claim
October 10, 2012
Jennifer NelsonThe 7th Circuit Court of Appeals has reversed the denial of a man’s request for disability benefits from the Social
Security Administration because it found the administrative law judge didn’t adequately explain why the man hadn’t
met requirements for a presumptive disability.
MoreDivided appeals court affirms disabled firefighter’s enhanced PERF benefit
October 9, 2012
Dave StaffordA Brownsburg firefighter is entitled to disability benefits that a trial court enhanced after an appeal from the local pension
board, a divided court of appeals panel ruled Tuesday.
More7th Circuit rejects disability appeal
September 7, 2012
Dave StaffordAn Indiana man lost his appeal of denial of Social Security disability benefits Friday at the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals.
More7th Circuit orders disability case back to administrative law judge
August 28, 2012
Because the Social Security Administration Appeals Council did not consider new evidence when it was presented – despite
its own regulations requiring it to do so – the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals sent a disability insurance benefits case
back to the administrative law judge for further proceedings.
MoreWorker's disability denial affirmed at 7th Circuit
July 31, 2012
Dave StaffordA former worker whose degenerating discs and spondylolisthesis caused her to no longer be able to work as a sales rep for
AstraZeneca was not improperly deprived of benefits when the insurer terminated them.
MoreMan not entitled to disability benefits
July 20, 2012
Jennifer NelsonThe 7th Circuit Court of Appeals was sympathetic to a man’s medical condition but affirmed the decision by an administrative
law judge that he’s not disabled is supported by the evidence.
MoreJudges order another look at whether woman qualifies for disability
April 2, 2012
Jennifer NelsonThe 7th Circuit Court of Appeals has found that an administrative law judge failed to properly assess a woman’s residual
functional capacity in deciding whether she qualified for disability insurance benefits from the Social Security Administration.
The judges ordered the case back to the agency for further proceedings.
MoreJustices: injured cop prevented by law from rejoining force
March 6, 2012
Jennifer NelsonA police officer who was injured in the 1980s and received disability benefits – but later was physically able to rejoin
the police department – is statutorily prohibited against returning to the force, the Indiana Supreme Court decided
in answering a certified question.
MoreAppellate court tackles child support issues
October 12, 2011
Jennifer NelsonIn three opinions released Wednesday, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled on child support issues – the application of
Social Security benefits to an arrearage and whether two fathers who were incarcerated for not paying child support could
have their support obligations modified.
MoreLawyer can argue for cost-of-living adjustment for increased fees
August 5, 2011
Jennifer NelsonThe 7th Circuit Court of Appeals has decided that an attorney that successfully represented a client in a Social Security
disability benefits suit should be allowed to make a request for a cost-of-living adjustment that would exceed the maximum
$125 per hour that can be awarded under the Equal Access to Justice Act.
MoreJudge approves proposed settlement agreement
July 22, 2011
Jennifer NelsonA federal judge has approved a proposed settlement agreement in a class-action lawsuit against the Indiana Family and Social
Services Administration alleging that an agency policy that doesn’t allow certain Medicaid waiver enrollees to apply
for services other than what’s been approved by their case manager is in violation of federal Medicaid law.
MoreState responsible for costs in relocating Medicaid patients
April 11, 2011
Jennifer NelsonIndiana Family and Social Services must reimburse an Arcadia, Ind., long-term care facility for the costs the facility paid
in caring for Medicaid patients after FSSA ended its provider agreement based on the conditions at the facility, the Indiana
Court of Appeals ruled Monday.
MoreALJ didn't inform vocational expert on the totality of claimant's limitations
November 29, 2010
Jennifer NelsonThe 7th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a District Court’s upholding of the Social Security Administration’s
denial of a woman’s application for benefits because the Administrative Law Judge erred by not including her moderate
limitation on concentration, persistence, and pace in the hypothetical he posed to a vocational expert.
MoreCourt doesn't order contempt sanctions on state
June 8, 2009
Jennifer NelsonThe 7th Circuit Court of Appeals was presented with the question in an Indiana case of how much non-compliance of a consent
decree involving Medicaid applications is needed before a District Court can impose civil contempt sanctions.
MoreCourt: ALJ's ruling had several errors
February 11, 2009
Jennifer MehalikFinding an administrative law judge's decision to deny a woman's claim for disability benefits contained several significant
errors, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the District Court's affirmation of the denial and remanded the case
to the Social Security Administration.
MoreSponsored by
on Facebook & Twitter
on Facebook & Twitter
Indiana Lawyer on Facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Back to TopCopyright © All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Use.
Design, CMS, Hosting & Web Development :: ePublishing.
Additional Hosting & Delivery by
Qualified immunity, means that if you wear a badge, you are exempt from law and free to do anything you please! The courts will back badge toting individuals, because they think they are above the law as well. They think, they have judicial immunity, they do not.
Deeply, deeply concerned? I'll bet if it was the judge's money that had been swindled we'd see deep concern with actual consequences. First a Ponzi scheme, then a shell game with the assets…c'mon, hasn't Conour abused the judicial system and his clients long enough? I say enough already.
Wow, just wow.
Forcing a defendant to wear a stun belt, in court or otherwise, is a violation of american principles! It is also unconstitutional!
So, if I save $100.00 cash per week, from my $500.00 per week paycheck, for 50 years, at which time, I will have saved $260,000.00, the government can raid my home and take my money, just by saying it is drug money! Shouldn't the government, have some kind of evidence of drugs, rather, than just saying we are the government and we will take anything you own, anytime we choose? Tyranny is upon us! If you don't know your rights, you don't have any!