Legal Opinion
Crawford v. Barnhart
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided June 2, 2008No. Civil Action 06-0436 (RMU)PublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Granting the Plaintiff’s Motion for Judgment of Reversal 1 ; Denying the Defendant’s Motion for Judgment of Affirmance
RICARDO M. URBINA, District Judge.
I. INTRODUCTION
Before the court are the plaintiffs motion for judgment of reversal and the defendant’s motion for judgment of affir- manee. Woodrow Crawford (“the plaintiff’) claims he is entitled to Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”) because he is unable to work due to a back problem. The defendant, the Commissioner of Social Security, denied the plaintiffs request for benefits, relying on an Administrative Law Judge’s…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Richardson v. PeralesSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Consolidated Edison Co. v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Heckler v. CampbellSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Cordie Curry v. Kenneth S. Apfel, Commissioner of Social SecurityCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2000
- Butler, Joan S. v. Barnhart, Jo Anne B.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2004
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- ADEMAKINWA v. AstrueDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2010
- Ross v. AstrueDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2009
- Nicholson v. Social Security AdministrationDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2012
- Broyles v. BarnhartDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2012
- Dunham v. AstrueDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2009
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.