| Social Security has a set of Impairment Listings. At one | | | | focus of the decision was on the back problem and |
| time "obesity" had an impairment listing. Thus, if the | | | | not her "obesity." |
| applicant was of a certain height and weight, then the | | | | In another case I had the applicant was a man who |
| applicant received Disability. For example, if you were | | | | was over 375 pounds with congestive heart failure. |
| 5'2" and 300 pounds, then you were well on your way | | | | Again, prior to 1999 he would have met the "obesity" |
| to winning a Disability Case if you had any impairments | | | | listing. Instead, we had the hearing and the judge denied |
| in addition to your "obesity". | | | | the claim on the grounds he had not done enough to |
| In 1999, Social Security changed the Rules and deleted | | | | lose weight. The United States District Court reversed |
| the Impairment Listing for "obesity". Social Security did | | | | the social security judge and we are awaiting a new |
| say it would consider the effects of "obesity" with | | | | hearing. But again, this case shows the rules have |
| regard to other listed impairments such as respiratory | | | | changed and "obesity" no longer is the "slam dunk" |
| impairments, cardiovascular impairments, and | | | | winner it once was. |
| muscoloskeletal impairments (back problems). | | | | This may be considered AN ADVERTISEMENT or |
| In a recent case I had a young lady who was 400 | | | | Advertising Material under the Rules of Professional |
| pounds and had spinal stenosis. Prior to 1999, she | | | | Conduct governing lawyers in Virginia. This note is |
| probably would have met the Impairment Listing for | | | | designed for general information only. The information |
| "obesity". Since the rules have changed, we had to go | | | | presented in this note should not be construed to be |
| to a hearing before a judge and demonstrate the | | | | formal legal advice nor the formation of a lawyer/client |
| severity of her back problem. We won but the primary | | | | relationship. |