Legal Opinion
Daniels v. Apfel
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Decided August 18, 1998No. 98-5004PublishedCited by 60 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BROWN, Senior District Judge.
The primary question on this appeal is whether the Commissioner adequately con sidered the fact that claimant Wilmer Daniels was only a little more than two months short of being in an age category in which he would be presumptively disabled, when the Commissioner found him not disabled based on the Medical-Vocational Guidelines, 20 C.F.R. Pt. 404, Subpt. P, App. 2 (the “grids”). Because we conclude that, contrary to agency regulations and rulings, the Commissioner failed to consider the fact that claimant fell within a “borderline” age situation and therefore…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Texas Department of Community Affairs v. BurdineSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Glen W. WILLIAMS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Otis R. BOWEN, M.D., Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1988
- Heckler v. CampbellSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Kirk v. Secretary of Health and Human ServicesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1981
- William T. WINFREY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Shirley S. CHATER, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1996
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by60 opinions
- Orn v. AstrueCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
- Maria Teresa Pupo v. Commissioner, Social Security AdministrationCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2021
- Lockwood v. Commissioner Social Security AdministrationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010
- Diana Phillips v. Michael J. AstrueCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2012
- Bowie v. Commissioner of Social SEC.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2008
55 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.