BURKE v. BERRYHILL
Plaintiff: GARY F. BURKE
Defendant: NANCY A. BERRYHILL
Miscellaneous: SSA (Court Use Only) and SSA-USAO (Court Use Only)
Case Number: 1:2018cv00833
Filed: March 15, 2018
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana
Office: Indianapolis Office
Presiding Judge: Tim A. Baker
Presiding Judge: Jane Magnus-Stinson
Nature of Suit: Social Security: DIWC/DIWW
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWW)
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
October 10, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 14 ENTRY REVIEWING THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER'S DECISION - Plaintiff Gary B. applied for supplemental security income from the Social Security Administration ("SSA") on September 8, 2014, alleging an onset date of June 1, 1992. [Filing N o. 5 -2 at 34.] His application was initially denied on December 3, 2014, [Filing No. 5 -7 at 2], and upon reconsideration on March 20, 2015, [Filing No. 5 -7 at 9]. Administrative Law Judge Julia Gibbs (the "ALJ") held a hearing on M ay 24, 2016. [Filing No. 5 -2 at 52-92.] The ALJ issued a decision on March 1, 2017, concluding that Gary B. was not entitled to receive supplemental security income. [Filing No. 5 -2 at 31.] The Appeals Council denied review on January 22, 2018 . [Filing No. 5 -2 at 2.] On March 15, 2018, Gary B. timely filed this civil action asking the Court to review the denial of benefits according to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) and 42 U.S.C. § 1383(c). [Filing No. 1 .] "The standard for disa bility claims under the Social Security Act is stringent." Williams-Overstreet v. Astrue, 364 F. App'x 271, 274 (7th Cir. 2010). "Even claimants with substantial impairments are not necessarily entitled to benefits, which are paid f or by taxes, including taxes paid by those who work despite serious physical or mental impairments and for whom working is difficult and painful." Id. at 274. Taken together, the Court can find no legal basis presented by Gary B. to reverse the ALJ's decision that he was not disabled during the relevant time period. Therefore, the decision below is AFFIRMED. Final judgment will issue accordingly. (See Entry). Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 10/10/2018.(APD)
Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Indiana Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: BURKE v. BERRYHILL
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: NANCY A. BERRYHILL
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: GARY F. BURKE
Represented By: Charles D. Hankey
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Miscellaneous: SSA (Court Use Only)
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Miscellaneous: SSA-USAO (Court Use Only)
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?