Mikol v. Barnhart

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that new facts cannot be considered on a motion for reconsideration
• reconsidering decision affirming the denial of disability benefits in light of subsequent administrative decision that was favorable to the claimant
• granting reconsideration where a subsequent ALJ decision had not been “before the [c]ourt when the motion for judgment on the pleadings was decided” and that “might have an effect on the earlier unfavorable decision upon remand”
• “Plaintiff’s ‘disagreement’ with our prior determination is not an appropriate ground for reconsideration.” (citation omitted)
• “[G]ood cause does exist because the subsequent favorable decision was not issued until after the decision.”
• “It is difficult to believe that on August 3, 2004 plaintiff was not disabled even though he had a history of pain and surgeries which supported a determination that on August 4, 2004 plaintiff was suddenly disabled.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).