Daniel C. Irick

How Judge Irick rules, drawn from 8 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

Court
United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida
Position
magistrate
Commissioned
2016-10-01
Education
University of Florida, B.A. (2000); University of Florida College of Law, J.D. (2004)
Signed orders read
8

How Judge Irick decides

Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

What persuades

RFC formulation under the post-2017 regs: an ALJ does NOT 'play doctor' or impermissibly substitute his own judgment by finding the medical opinions less than persuasive (on supportability/consistency) and then assessing the RFC from the record as a whole. There is no requirement that an RFC be based on any physician's opinion: the RFC is a matter reserved to the ALJ. A claimant who argues only that the RFC fails because it doesn't track a specific doctor's opinion loses.

“an ALJ cannot substitute his judgment for that of the medical sources, but there is no requirement that an RFC must be based on a physician's opinion. ... it is the ALJ's responsibility to determine the ultimate issue of the Claimant's RFC, and not the physicians.”

Preservation / record development: a challenge to the ALJ's persuasiveness findings that is raised only perfunctorily, without supporting argument or authority, is deemed waived (McClain of Ga.); and the ALJ need not order a consultative exam, a testifying medical advisor, or interrogatories unless the claimant shows an evidentiary gap producing unfairness or 'clear prejudice' (Henry, Ellison).

“Issues raised in a perfunctory manner, without supporting arguments and citation to authorities, are generally deemed to be waived.”

Medical-opinion analysis must address both supportability and consistency. Farmer and McKiver show that discussing a source's own records can satisfy supportability but does not replace an explanation of how the opinion compares with the rest of the medical evidence; later litigation arguments cannot supply an analysis the ALJ omitted.

“The ALJ is required to discuss how a medical source’s opinion is consistent with other evidence within the record.”

Fee applicants should exercise billing judgment before filing. In Wilson, Irick cut excessive administrative-record review and excluded clerical work, awarding 41.8 hours rather than the larger request.

“If fee applicants do not exercise billing judgment, courts are obligated to do it for them”

A medical-opinion analysis is read as a whole rather than tested for formulaic wording or repeated pinpoint citations. In Keene, Irick found the administrative law judge's explanation reviewable because the surrounding discussion identified the relevant supportability and consistency evidence.

“The ALJ was not required to use any ‘magic words’ nor was she required to cite to specific portions of the record in discussing her determination.”

Signed rulings

A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.

Riley v. Commissioner of Social Security
6:22-cv-01415 · 2023-04-11
Social security appeal (plaintiff) Denied

“For the stated reasons, it is ORDERED that: 1. The final decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED; and 2. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment for the Commissioner and close the case.”

Stoloff v. Commissioner of Social Security
6:23-cv-00001 · 2024-03-27
Social security appeal (plaintiff) Denied

“The final decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED”

Leigh v. Commissioner of Social Security
6:23-cv-00212 · 2024-03-05
Social security appeal (plaintiff) Denied

“The Commissioner’s decision is AFFIRMED”

Farmer v. Commissioner of Social Security
6:23-cv-00248 · 2023-12-29
Social security appeal (plaintiff) Granted

“The final decision of the Commissioner is REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g)”

McKiver v. Commissioner of Social Security
6:23-cv-00712 · 2024-05-06
Social security appeal (plaintiff) Granted

“The final decision of the Commissioner is REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g)”

Deligdish v. Bender
6:23-cv-00417 · 2023-08-07
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted in part

“Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 31) is GRANTED in part to the extent that Plaintiff’s fraud claim (Count IV) is hereby DISMISSED. The remainder of the Motion (Doc. 31) is DENIED.”

Wilson, Jr. v. Commissioner of Social Security
6:23-cv-00007 · 2024-04-10
Motion for attorney fees (plaintiff) Granted in part

“Plaintiff’s Motion (Doc. 34) is GRANTED in part to the extent that Plaintiff is awarded 41.8 hours for this appeal representing a total fee award of $8,820.16”

Keene v. Commissioner of Social Security
6:24-cv-00023-DCI · 2024-07-22
Social security appeal (plaintiff) Denied

“1. The final decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED; and 2. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment for the Commissioner and close the case.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

  • The sampled civil docket is dominated by Social Security appeals.
  • Those cases are initially assigned to a district judge with Judge Irick handling referred matters, then reassigned to him as the final judge when the parties consent under 28 U.S.C. section 636(c).
  • The sample contains thirty consent Social Security dispositions plus a consent dismissal and fee ruling; no authoritative case-disposition baseline was available for the period.

Draft for Judge Irick with the record in hand

Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Irick, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Grounded in Judge Irick's own signed orders
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace