Legal Opinion
McPherson v. Apfel
District Court, N.D. Iowa
Decided August 31, 2000No. C99-3049-MWB, C99-3056-MWB, C99-3057-MWB, C99-3058-MWB, C99-4059-MWBPublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER REGARDING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
BENNETT, Chief Judge.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I.INTRODUCTION. ^ ZD
A. Background To The Five Cases. ZD
B. The Commissioner’s Objections. ZD
II. LEGAL ANALYSIS .1167
A. Review Of A Report And Recommendation.1167
B. The Commissioner’s Burden At Step Five.1168
1. Burden of “proof’ or “production”?.1168
2. Nature of the burden.1169
a. The Commissioner’s failure to acknowledge controlling authority .1170
b. The controlling authority.1172
S. Is the statement of the Commissioner’s burden in Nevland “misleading” and “confusing”?.1173
U.…
2Cases cited44 opinions
- Bowen v. YuckertSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Sheila J. Young v. Kenneth S. Apfel, Commissioner of Social SecurityCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2000
- Larry Grinder, Edward A. Loetel v. James A. Gammon Dora B. SchriroCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1996
- Sharon K. COX, Appellant, v. Kenneth S. APFEL, Commissioner of Social Security, AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1998
- Allen R. Prosch v. Kenneth S. Apfel, Commissioner of Social SecurityCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2000
39 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Brock v. ApfelDistrict Court, W.D. Missouri · 2000
- Tinker v. BarnhartDistrict Court, N.D. Oklahoma · 2002
- Tinker v. BarnhartDistrict Court, N.D. Oklahoma · 2002