Brief & decision
[Angela S.] v. O’Malley
D.N.J. Oct. 24, 2024
In this download
- The brief or briefs as filed with the court
- The court’s written decision
- Searchable PDF, formatted for printing
Written and filed by Sarah H. Bohr
Delivered by email the moment you order
Federal court brief
[Angela S.] v. O’Malley
D.N.J. Oct. 24, 2024
Medical opinions, RFC – reliance on ALJ’s lay interpretation of the record, sentence six new evidence remand
$75
One-time purchase · instant download
- Won in the court listed above — the arguments that worked, as filed
- Adapt the structure and authorities to your own case
- No subscription, no account required
About this case
[Angela S.] v. O’Malley, No. CV 23-22441 (RK), 2024 WL 4563910 (D.N.J. Oct. 24, 2024) (Decision by U.S. District Judge Robert Kirsch)
Briefs for purchase: Plaintiff’s Brief, Plaintiff’s Reply Brief and court decision
Topics addressed:
- Medical opinions – supportability
- Medical opinions – consistency
- Medical opinions – articulation requirements
- RFC – reliance on ALJ’s lay interpretation of the record
- Sentence six remands due to new evidence
Ruling addressed:
• Social Security Ruling 96-8p
Issues briefed:
1) The ALJ did not properly consider Dr. Tishuk’s opinion.
2) The residual functional capacity finding is the product of a lay evaluation and is not supported by substantial evidence.
3) Remand pursuant to Sentence Six is merited due to new and material evidence submitted to the Appeals Council.
Court decision: After full briefing, the court issued an opinion and remanded for further proceedings.