Remediable Impairment

11 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• Columbus Ratliff v. Celebrezze
  338 F.2d 978· 6th Cir.· 1964-12-08 ·cited 38×
  The court held that the claimant proved his disability to engage in substantial gainful work, and the Secretary failed to meet the burden of proving the claimant could perform other work.
• Seldon Davidson v. Gardner
  370 F.2d 803· 6th Cir.· 1966-12-28 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the Secretary erred in strictly construing disability provisions and in requiring objective medical evidence for impairments, especially pain, and that a man suffering constant pain is not obliged to engage in substantial gainful activity.
• Hammock v. Bowen
  867 F.2d 1209· 9th Cir.· 1989-02-09 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the Secretary's denial of benefits was not supported by substantial evidence because the Secretary failed to credit the treating physician's opinion, failed to articulate reasons for discrediting the claimant's pain testimony, and failed to consider the combin
• Dumas v. Schweiker
  712 F.2d 1545· 2d Cir.· 1983-06-22 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the Secretary's determination that the claimant is not entitled to disability benefits is supported by substantial evidence and free from legal error.
• Benson v. Heckler
  780 F.2d 16· 8th Cir.· 1985-12-18 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the administrative law judge erred in discounting the claimant's allegations of pain and depression without sufficient objective evidence and in failing to consider the combined impact of her impairments.
• Purdham v. Celebrezze
  349 F.2d 828· 4th Cir.· 1965-07-02 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the claimant's disabling back condition could not reasonably be regarded as remediable, and therefore, he was entitled to disability benefits.
• Pacheco v. Louis W. Sullivan, M.D.
  931 F.2d 695· 10th Cir.· 1991-04-30 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the Secretary improperly terminated disability benefits without finding that the claimant refused prescribed, remediable treatment without justifiable excuse.
• Nichols v. Califano
  556 F.2d 931· 9th Cir.· 1977-06-08 ·cited 4×
  The dissenting judge argues that a claimant refusing a reasonably remediable impairment is not entitled to disability benefits.
• Egbert Wells Stephens v. Ribicoff
  307 F.2d 304· 4th Cir.· 1962-08-30 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Secretary's denial of disability benefits was not supported by sufficient evidence regarding the remediability of the claimant's condition.
• Tsarelka v. Sec'y OF Health & Human Servs.
  842 F.2d 529· 1st Cir.· 1988-03-17 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the Secretary's decision denying disability benefits was supported by substantial evidence, particularly claimant's failure to pursue prescribed treatment or demonstrate her impairment was not remediable.
• Cuthrell v. Celebrezze
  330 F.2d 48· 4th Cir.· 1964-03-26 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the claimant's physical impairment, despite surgical interventions, constituted a disability under the Social Security Act because it was of long-continued and indefinite duration and prevented substantial gainful activity, considering his age, education, and