April was a quiet month in the Seventh Circuit. The Court issued one unpublished affirmation in a case involving a pro se claimant:

Sanders v. Kijakazi (affirmed, unpublished)

Judges Easterbrook, Wood, and Kirsch

Apr. 18, 2023

Sanders, a nurse, injured his shoulder at work and underwent surgery before returning to his job six months later. There was evidence of earnings during the next nine months until he contracted COVID-19, after which a psychiatrist opined that the pandemic worsened Sanders’ anxiety and depression and that he should either be on leave or work away from his employer’s COVID-19 isolation unit. Sanders left his job. An ALJ found that Sanders’ post-surgery work was disqualifying SGA and that he was otherwise not disabled at Step Five with a reduced light RFC.

Before the Seventh Circuit, Sanders argued that the District Court should have appointed an attorney for him. 28 U.S.C. §1915(e)(1) states that a court “may” ask an attorney to represent an indigent person. The Seventh Circuit agreed that the District Court’s denial of counsel was reasonable where it was based on Sanders’ college education, intellectual abilities, and familiarity with his record.

Otherwise, Sanders argued that his post-surgery earnings resulted from an unsuccessful work attempt, alleging that he stopped working earlier than his earnings suggested. The Court held that it was Sanders’ burden to furnish evidence that he stopped working earlier and that he did not do so. And Sanders challenged the ALJ’s light RFC as inadequately restrictive, but the Court noted that Sanders’ surgeon released him back to work and that Sanders’ statements about his abilities were consistent with the RFC.

Thanks for reading!

Ryan Tank
ryantank@spectorandlenz.com
Spector & Lenz, P.C.
Chicago, IL