Hilary, Nathan, and oral argument – It's not what you think
/
Ordinarily, the mention of husband and wife in the same sentence as the term "oral argument" isn't a good thing. However, Hilary and Nathan recently showed there is an exception to this rule!
Nathan argued a big truck collision case before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit on January 16 in St. Louis. In this case, the Chaney Law Firm is defending a jury verdict it won for a client in federal district court in Hot Springs in January 2012. One issue on appeal dealt with the routine use of medical visual aids based upon digitized x-rays and proton density MRIs. The other main issue on appeal was a procedural question concerning two professional defense witnesses that were excluded; the defense tried to call these new experts at the last minute because its original expert's theory of degeneration did not hold up under cross-examination. You can listen to Nathan's argument here.
Hilary argued a social security disability case before the Eighth Circuit on February 14 in Kansas City. Hilary's case involved issues of whether the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) gave the proper amount of weight to all the medical evidence. Hilary argued that the ALJ erred by only considering just five pages of medical records from just one doctor who said he didn't have enough information to fill out the disability paperwork, when hundreds of other pages of records from four other doctors showed our firm's client is truly disabled. Even the one doctor the ALJ relied upon prescribed narcotics on at least 13 different occasions, yet the ALJ found our client's pain was not severe enough to preclude work. This case truly shows why many people need legal representation when dealing with the Social Security Administration. You can listen to Hilary's argument here.
It is truly a high honor and great privilege to argue before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. Below are pictures from the courtrooms in St. Louis and Kansas City. Which has the better view?
