The “Accurate and Logical Bridge” – Track I [Day 4] (Presented by National Organization of Social Security Claimants’ Representatives)
Rob is a board-certified specialist in Social Security Disability law through the National Board of Trial Advocacy (NBTA). In over 40 years of practice in Charleston, Rob has handled thousands of federal administrative law judge hearings and hundreds of federal court appeals representing disability claimants across the state of South Carolina.
Sarah H. Bohr has specialized in Social Security law for over 40 years and writes winning briefs for filing in Social Security federal court cases in the district courts in nearly half of the states as well as most circuit courts of appeal. Sarah is most proud of her successful argument before the Supreme Court in Sims v. Apfel, 530 U.S. 103 (2000), which turned out to be instrumental to the success of her career as it allows her to approach each federal appeal as a puzzle and to figure out the best issues to raise.
1 hour CLE
Get this course, plus over 1,000+ live webinars.
Learn More
Program Summary
This session will discuss how to challenge unfavorable Social Security disability decisions. It will explain the “logical bridge” principle, which requires Administrative Law Judges (ALJs) to clearly connect the evidence in the record to their conclusions. Originating from Seventh Circuit precedent (e.g., Sarchet v. Chater), this principle has been widely adopted by federal courts across all circuits. The authors stress that courts cannot uphold a decision—even if supported by some evidence—if the ALJ fails to explain how the evidence logically supports their findings.
The bulk of the session documents are compiled of case law from every federal circuit where courts have remanded Social Security cases because ALJs failed to provide adequate reasoning. These cases show recurring errors such as:
- Ignoring or selectively citing evidence
- Failing to explain rejections of medical opinions
- Making conclusory credibility findings without support
- Not addressing conflicting or contrary evidence
The resources provide practitioners with citations and examples to argue for remand when ALJs do not build the required logical bridge. It emphasizes that the ALJ—not agency lawyers—must supply the reasoning, enabling meaningful judicial review.
Key topics to be discussed:
- The “Logical Bridge” Requirement in Disability Decisions
- Common Judicially-Recognized Errors Leading to Remand
- Building Effective Appeals Using Case Law and Record Analysis
This course is co-sponsored with myLawCLE.
Eligible for up to 1 CLE Credit Hour
This session was originally submitted for CLE as a live, in-person presentation and a live webcast for the Fall 2025 National Conference – Track I Conference and may be eligible for self-study credit.
Each state handles self-study credit differently; for questions, please consult your State Bar Association.
Recorded on September 12, 2025
Closed-captioning available
Speakers
Rob Wendt | National Organization of Social Security Claimants’ Representatives
Rob is a board-certified specialist in Social Security Disability law through the National Board of Trial Advocacy (NBTA). In over 40 years of practice in Charleston, Rob has handled thousands of federal administrative law judge hearings and hundreds of federal court appeals representing disability claimants across the state of South Carolina.
Currently, Rob is an officer and Fourth Circuit board member of the National Organization of Social Security Claimants’ Representatives (NOSSCR) and is a board member of the NBTA and its Social Security Disability Specialty Commission and exam committee. Rob is a frequent presenter and moderator in continuing legal education seminars on Social Security disability practice.
Rob has been a leader in the Social Security Disability bar at the state and national levels, including service as a board member and chair of the South Carolina Association for Justice (SCAJ) Social Security Law Section, founding member and chair of the American Association for Justice (AAJ) Social Security Disability Law Section, and board member of the SC Chapter of the Federal Bar Association.
Sarah Bohr
Sarah H. Bohr has specialized in Social Security law for over 40 years and writes winning briefs for filing in Social Security federal court cases in the district courts in nearly half of the states as well as most circuit courts of appeal. Sarah is most proud of her successful argument before the Supreme Court in Sims v. Apfel, 530 U.S. 103 (2000), which turned out to be instrumental to the success of her career as it allows her to approach each federal appeal as a puzzle and to figure out the best issues to raise.
She also successfully recently worked on three key published Social Security cases addressing depression in Simon v. Comm’r, 7 F.4th 1094 (11th Cir. 2021) and Shelley C. v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 61 F.4th 341 (4th Cir. 2023) and addressing fibromyalgia in Arakas v. Comm’r, Soc. Sec. Admin., 983 F.3d 83 (4th Cir. 2020).
Agenda
I. The “Logical Bridge” Requirement in Disability Decisions | 12:45pm – 1:05pm
II. Common Judicially-Recognized Errors Leading to Remand | 1:05pm – 1:25pm
III. Building Effective Appeals Using Case Law and Record Analysis | 1:25pm – 1:45pm
More CLE Webinars
Trending CLE Webinars
Upcoming CLE Webinars
