Cluster 2315359
green
· 13 citation events
across 1 courts.
Showing the 12 strongest citers on record
(one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
green
Maksutoski v. Berryhill (2019)
See Marie O. v. Edgar, 131 F.3d 610 , 614 n.7 (7th Cir. 1997); Rogers v. Barnhart, 446 F. Supp. 2d 828, 851 (N.D.
green
Boyd v. Berryhill (2019)
Rogers v. Barnhart, 446 F. Supp. 2d 828, 851 (N.D.
holding that an argument that “could easily have been raised in the opening brief” was forfeited
green
Burgos v. Berryhill (2019)
Argyropoulos, 539 F.3d at 738 ; Rogers v. Barnhart, 446 F. Supp. 2d 828, 851 (N.D.
holding that an argument that “could easily have been raised in the opening brief” was waived
green
Moore v. Astrue (2012)
Her presentation is a reckless one, see Rogers v. Barnhart, 446 F.Supp.2d 828, 835 (N.D.Ill.2006) (“The more troubling aspect of the argument is its resort to the ‘ostrich-like tactic’ of pretending that critical components of the record essentially do not exist.
green
JERALDS EX REL. JERALDS v. Astrue (2010)
Rogers v. Barnhart, 446 F.Supp.2d 828, 834-835 (N.D.Ill.2006).
green
In Re Sulfuric Acid Antitrust Litigation (2006)
See Anderson v. Bessemer City, 470 U.S. 564, 575 , 105 S.Ct. 1504 , 84 L.Ed.2d 518 (1985); Rogers v. Barnhart, 2006 WL 2246868 at *16 (N.D.Ill.2006)(collecting cases). 13 .The motion argues that Dr. Boyd testified about the manner in which he compiled sulfuric acid price information: whom he interviews, how often, what markets are involved, and to what degree he used his judgment in reporting prices.
green
Roberts v. Kijakazi (2022)
See Rogers v. Barnhart, 446 F. Supp. 2d 828, 851 (N.D.
the failure to raise an argument in an opening brief constitutes a waiver of that argument
green
Falls v. Berryhill (2018)
See Rogers v. Barnhart, 446 F. Supp. 2d 828, 851 (N.D.
applying waiver to an argument that was first advanced in a reply brief
green
Falls v. Berryhill (2018)
See Rogers v. Barnhart, 446 F. Supp. 2d 828, 851 (N.D.
applying waiver to an argument that was first advanced in a reply brief
See Rogers v. Barnhart, 2006 WL 2246868 at *16-17 (N.D.Ill.2006)(collecting cases). .
green
Barr v. Saul (2020)
See, e.g., Rogers v. Barnhart, 446 F. Supp. 2d 828, 851 (N.D.
green
Jackson v. Saul (2020)
It is true that Dr. Wait’s notes do not state how long Claimant would need to be in the bathroom but “the mere absence of detailed treatment notes, without more, is insufficient grounds for disbelieving the evidence of a qualified professional.” Brown v. Colvin, 845 F.3d 247, 253 (7th Cir. 2016) (internal quotes and citation omitted); see also Rogers v. Barnhart, 446 F.Supp.2d 828, 857 (N.D.Ill. 2006) (noting that “inferences from silence in a clinician’s progress notes may …
noting that “inferences from silence in a clinician’s progress notes may be perilous”