Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filtersilsd

1,362 results

1.10s

  • Hernandez

    District Court, S.D. Illinois · Apr 22, 2026

    But “where evidence exists that the defendant knew better than to make the medical decision that he did,” deliberate indifference may be established. Id. (citation modified). … The Court agrees with Hernandez that this statement, at a minimum, qualifies as a present sense impression.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Brush v. Berryhill

    294 F. Supp. 3d 241 · District Court, S.D. Illinois · Mar 26, 2018

    The Second Circuit has characterized the substantial evidence standard as "a very deferential standard of review-even more so than the 'clearly erroneous' standard." Brault v. Soc. Sec. … Aug. 9, 2006) ("other sources," like a chiropractor, "cannot establish the existence of a medically determinable impairment ...

    Cited 26 timesPublished
  • Schwegel v. Commissioner of Social Security

    District Court, S.D. Illinois · Mar 17, 2021

    Applicable Legal Standards To qualify for benefits, a claimant must be “disabled” pursuant to the Social Security Act. … —do not actually exist as full- time jobs in those numbers, and many do not qualify as substantial gainful activity.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Taylor v. Commissioner of Social Security

    District Court, S.D. Illinois · Oct 13, 2022

    LEGAL STANDARD To qualify for SSI, a claimant must be disabled within the meaning of the applicable statutes. … Thus, the ALJ clearly considered Sherisa’s testimony regarding Plaintiff’s functioning since attaining the age of 18. III.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Wilson v. IDOC

    District Court, S.D. Illinois · May 25, 2022

    Plaintiff also alleges that he is a qualified individual with a disability and was previously prescribed an immobilizer knee brace for his right knee. … Defendant Jeffreys also maintains that he is entitled to summary judgment as Plaintiff cannot establish that he was denied reasonable accommodations related to his alleged disability.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Beamon v. Commissioner of Social Security

    District Court, S.D. Illinois · Feb 22, 2023

    THE ALJ’S DECISION To qualify for disability benefits, Plaintiff had to prove that he was “[unable] to engage in any substantial gainful activity by reason of any medically determinable … Astrue, 649 F.3d 565, 572 (7th Cir. 2011) (“[I]n the context of step five of our disability benefits analysis, it appears well-established that 1,000 jobs constitutes a significant number.”)

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Suggs v. United States

    District Court, S.D. Illinois · Mar 12, 2021

    On that date, the Court also established a deadline for any pretrial motions, including a motion to suppress. (CR. 14). … Clearly, the Court believed that any motion to suppress with respect to Suggs’s arrest would be meritless.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Burns v. Cunningham

    District Court, S.D. Illinois · Mar 29, 2023

    Butler, 960 F.3d 420, 427 (7th Cir. 2020) (holding three instances over nineteen months of one inmate’s prescription refill being delayed “fail[ed] to qualify as a widespread unconstitutional practice so well-settled that … Co., 698 F.3d 587, 598 (7th Cir. 2012) (“To prevail on a Rule 59(e) motion to amend judgment, a party must clearly establish (1) that the court committed a manifest error of law or fact, or (2) that newly discovered evidence

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Nackley v. Commissioner of Social Security

    District Court, S.D. Illinois · Oct 10, 2025

    DISABILITY UNDER THE SOCIAL SECURITY ACT To qualify for SSI, a claimant must be disabled within the meaning of the applicable statutes. … Astrue, 617 F.3d 923, 927 (7th Cir. 2010)); see also 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529 (“[S]tatements about your pain or other symptoms will not alone establish that you are disabled.”).

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Westenberger v. Commissioner of Social Security

    District Court, S.D. Illinois · Sep 23, 2024

    APPLICABLE LEGAL STANDARDS To qualify for DIB, a claimant must be disabled within the meaning of the applicable statutes and regulations. … Turning to the issue of Plaintiff’s vision, the ALJ stated, “[a]dditionally, though the claimant has alleged vision issues, associated with his diabetes, the claimant’s primary care physician records have not established

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Agnew v. Commissioner of Social Security

    District Court, S.D. Illinois · Aug 12, 2022

    The ALJ adopted the VE’s findings and ruled that Plaintiff was not disabled and thus did not qualify for benefits. (Doc. 13-2, p. 27-28.) … This is a well-established rule. See Stewart v. Astrue, 561 F.3d 679, 684 (7th Cir. 2009) (collecting cases).

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Owens v. Wexford Health Sources, Inc.

    District Court, S.D. Illinois · Sep 26, 2022

    Furthermore, Owens “own testimony that he experienced untreated symptoms during the delay” and that a lack of pain medication caused his mobility to worsen does not qualify as verifying medical evidence.” Lisle v. … Thus, Wexford states that without showing that an individual medical provider was deliberately indifferent, he cannot establish liability on the part of Wexford.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Greer v. Commissioner of Social Security

    District Court, S.D. Illinois · Sep 27, 2021

    Applicable Legal Standards To qualify for DIB or SSI, a claimant must be disabled within the meaning of the applicable statutes.3 Under the Social Security Act, a person is disabled if she … At step five of the sequential evaluation process for determining disability, the Commissioner must establish “that the claimant can perform other work that exists in significant numbers in the national economy.”

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Williams v. Commissioner of Social Security

    District Court, S.D. Illinois · Mar 31, 2025

    Mikell, Gotanco, and Feinerman Plaintiff notes, given his age, he could have qualified for SSI if he was limited by the ALJ to sedentary rather than light work. (Doc. 18, pgs. 14-15). … As such, the Court finds the ALJ’s findings on this issue were clearly supported by substantial evidence. V.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Dow

    District Court, S.D. Illinois · Mar 31, 2026

    APPLICABLE LEGAL STANDARDS To qualify for DIB or SSI, a claimant must be disabled within the meaning of the applicable statutes and regulations.3 Under the Social Security Act, a person is … In other words, without providing that critical context, the statement relied upon by the ALJ was clearly cherry-picked.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Lewis v. Commissioner of Social Security

    District Court, S.D. Illinois · Mar 31, 2025

    APPLICABLE LEGAL STANDARDS To qualify for DIB or SSI, a claimant must be disabled within the meaning of the applicable statutes and regulations.3 Under the Social Security Act, a person is … On April 23, 2021, Plaintiff established care with Dr. Nadeem Ahmed, a pulmonologist, due to a reported shortness of breath (Tr. 406).

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • McCarty v. Commissioner of Social Security

    District Court, S.D. Illinois · Sep 29, 2023

    General Legal Standards To qualify for DIBs, a claimant must be disabled. To assess a disability, the ALJ employs a “five-step sequential evaluation process.” … The neurologist’s examination clearly informed the ALJ’s immediate analysis. (Doc. 14-9, pg. 25).

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Harris v. Commissioner of Social Security

    District Court, S.D. Illinois · Sep 9, 2024

    General Legal Standards To qualify for SSI, a claimant must be disabled. To assess an alleged disability, the ALJ employs a “five-step sequential evaluation process.” … Further, even if this argument was not waived, Plaintiff has not established error as to this issue.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Spiller v. Commissioner of Social Security

    District Court, S.D. Illinois · Sep 30, 2024

    The clinician opined that Plaintiff “clearly had signs of PTSD” and anxiety (Id.). … In September 2020, Plaintiff established care with Dr. Brent Jones at SIH Harrisburg Primary Care to begin MAT (see Tr. 2148–49; see also Tr. 2145–48). Dr.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Armour v. Santos

    District Court, S.D. Illinois · Oct 26, 2023

    Clearly, it is the doctors’ decision to give Plaintiff narcotic pain medication or order that Plaintiff be sent to a specialist, not the nurses. … To succeed on this claim, Plaintiff must establish the following: (1) “he is a ‘qualified individual with a disability’”; (2) “that he was denied ‘the benefits of the services, programs, or activities of a public entity

    Cited 0 timesUnknown

Ask Donna

Ask Donna

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.