Dicarlo v. Potter

2 Analyses of this case by attorneys

  1. Sixth Circuit

    Outten & Golden LLPPaul MollicaApril 5, 2011

    Outcome on Appeal: Reversed [plaintiff]. Grounds: Plaintiff not estopped by application for SSA benefits, where plaintiff was statutorily blind for purposes of obtaining benefits, but qualified to work as physical therapy assistant.DiCarlo v. Potter, 358 F.3d 408, 93 FEP 456 (6th Cir. 2004). Panel: MOORE, Martin [KENNEDY, concurring and dissenting].

  2. Sixth Circuit

    Outten & Golden LLPMarch 18, 2008

    Outcome on Appeal: Reversed [plaintiff]. Grounds: Plaintiff not estopped by application for SSA benefits, where plaintiff was statutorily blind for purposes of obtaining benefits, but qualified to work as physical therapy assistant.DiCarlo v. Potter, 358 F.3d 408, 93 FEP 456 (6th Cir. 2004). Panel: MOORE, Martin [KENNEDY, concurring and dissenting].