Opinion ID: 65943
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Hearing Before ALJ

Text: An attorney, Erik Berger, originally filed Newberger’s request for a waiver, but then withdrew from representing her one month later on October 24, 2005. 1 We review whether the ALJ’s findings are supported by substantial evidence and whether the correct legal standards were applied. Graham v. Apfel, 129 F.3d 1420, 1422 (11th Cir. 1997). 2 Newberger then filed her own request for a waiver and had still not retained an attorney by the time of the February 16, 2006 hearing on her waiver request. At the hearing on her waiver request, the ALJ discussed with Newberger the fact that she was unrepresented. The ALJ pointed out that in the notice of the hearing there was information advising her that she could have her attorney represent her at the hearing. When the ALJ asked Newberger whether she wished to proceed without a lawyer, Newberger responded, “Yeah. I couldn’t get anybody to, to do it.” The ALJ stated, “Long as we have it clear that you wish to proceed without that representation at this time, I will continue with the hearing.” Newberger testified that she did not realize she was married to Poole until she received a letter from the SSA informing her so. Newberger explained that she and Poole obtained a marriage application only so that Newberger’s ex-husband would “think [she] was married because when [they] did the restraining order, the