Connection lost
Server error
Mark Hagans v. Commissioner Social Security Case Brief
Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs
Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: The court affirmed the SSA’s decision, holding that the agency’s Acquiescence Ruling interpreting the disability cessation date was entitled to Skidmore deference, not Chevron, and was persuasive.
Legal Significance: This case clarifies that SSA Acquiescence Rulings, lacking the force of law, are reviewed under Skidmore deference, and establishes the persuasiveness of the SSA’s interpretation of the relevant date for disability cessation review.
Mark Hagans v. Commissioner Social Security Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
Mark Hagans appealed the cessation of his Social Security disability benefits. The Social Security Administration (SSA) determined his disability ceased on September 1, 2004. Hagans argued the review date should be the date of the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) hearing, which would place him in a more favorable age category. The SSA relied on its Acquiescence Ruling 92-2(6) (AR 92-2(6)), which interprets 42 U.S.C. § 423(f) to mean that the disability status is evaluated as of the date the SSA initially determined cessation was proper. AR 92-2(6) was issued without notice-and-comment rulemaking and states it does not have the force and effect of law but is binding on SSA components. The core dispute involved the level of deference owed to this Acquiescence Ruling and its interpretation of the statutory terms ‘now able’ and ‘current condition’ in § 423(f) concerning the timing of the disability assessment in cessation proceedings. The District Court affirmed the SSA’s decision, using the September 1, 2004 date.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: What level of judicial deference is owed to the Social Security Administration’s Acquiescence Ruling interpreting 42 U.S.C. § 423(f) to require evaluation of a disability benefits recipient’s status as of the date the SSA initially determined disability ceased, rather than the date of a subsequent ALJ hearing?
The SSA’s Acquiescence Ruling 92-2(6) is entitled to Skidmore deference, not Chevron Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo c
IRAC Legal Analysis
Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.
Legal Issue
What level of judicial deference is owed to the Social Security Administration’s Acquiescence Ruling interpreting 42 U.S.C. § 423(f) to require evaluation of a disability benefits recipient’s status as of the date the SSA initially determined disability ceased, rather than the date of a subsequent ALJ hearing?
Conclusion
This decision establishes that SSA Acquiescence Rulings are subject to *Skidmore* deference Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco la
Legal Rule
Agency interpretations, such as those in SSA Acquiescence Rulings that lack the Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat n
Legal Analysis
The court first determined that 42 U.S.C. § 423(f), specifically its use Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fu
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- The relevant date for Social Security disability cessation under 42 U.S.C.