Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Phillip Lay v. Andrew M. Saul, 19-1893 (2020)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit Number: 19-1893 Visitors: 8
Judges: Per Curiam
Filed: Jan. 29, 2020
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION To be cited only in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit Chicago, Illinois 60604 Argued January 29, 2020 Decided January 29, 2020 Before WILLIAM J. BAUER, Circuit Judge FRANK H. EASTERBROOK, Circuit Judge MICHAEL B. BRENNAN, Circuit Judge No. 19-1893 Appeal from the United States District Court for the PHILLIP LAY, Northern District of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellant, Eastern Division. v. No. 17 CV 8285 ANDREW M. SA
More
                              NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION
                       To be cited only in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1




                   United States Court of Appeals
                                 For the Seventh Circuit
                                 Chicago, Illinois 60604
                                  Argued January 29, 2020
                                  Decided January 29, 2020



                                            Before

                             WILLIAM J. BAUER, Circuit Judge

                             FRANK H. EASTERBROOK, Circuit Judge

                             MICHAEL B. BRENNAN, Circuit Judge



No. 19-1893                                                   Appeal from the United
                                                              States District Court for the
PHILLIP LAY,                                                  Northern District of Illinois,
      Plaintiff-Appellant,
                                                              Eastern Division.
              v.
                                                              No. 17 CV 8285
ANDREW M. SAUL,                                               Young B. Kim,
Commissioner of Social Security,                              Magistrate Judge.
     Defendant-Appellee.

                                             Order

    Phillip Lay’s application for disability benefits under the Social Security Act was re-
jected administratively, with review culminating in an adverse decision by an adminis-
trative law judge. The dispute moved to district court, where the parties agreed to have
a magistrate judge make the final decision. 28 U.S.C. §636(c). The magistrate judge con-
cluded that the ALJ’s decision is supported by substantial evidence and does not reflect
a material legal error. 
2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41780
(N.D. Ill. Mar. 14, 2019). We substan-
tially agree with the magistrate judge’s analysis, and on that basis the judgment is

                                                                                    AFFIRMED.

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer