Anthony Reeves v. Comm'r of Social Security
618 F. App'x 267
6th Cir.2015Background
- Reeves, born 1967, stopped working in Nov 2007; applied for DIB and SSI alleging neck, knee, and heart problems with onset Oct 1, 2009.
- Medical records show prior cervical surgery (1990), degenerative cervical disc disease, left-arm radiculopathy, tenderness and some reduced left-arm strength; imaging showed no acute fracture/dislocation/herniation.
- Consultative and treating evaluations: single visit with orthopedic Dr. Biyani (tenderness, diminished cervical ROM, recommended PT but minimal follow-up); consultative examiner Dr. Diaz noted widespread left-sided numbness and ROM deficits and raised possible malingering/neurologic or alcohol-related causes; state agency physicians found limits consistent with reduced range of light work.
- Mental-health records: treatment for depression, anxiety, alcohol dependence with GAF scores generally in the 41–60 range; consultative psychologist (Dr. Shamberg) found marked social/stress limits whereas state psychologists assessed moderate limitations and assigned partial weight to Dr. Shamberg.
- ALJ assessed an RFC for a reduced range of light work: occasional overhead reaching/handling and fine manipulation with left arm, sit/stand option, simple repetitive tasks, occasional public interaction; ALJ gave great weight to state agency opinions and some weight to Dr. Diaz and described but did not assign treating-source controlling weight to Dr. Biyani.
- District court affirmed the Commissioner; Sixth Circuit reviewed for substantial evidence and legal error and affirmed the denial of benefits.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether ALJ erred by not giving treating physician Dr. Biyani controlling weight | Reeves: Biyani was a treating source whose findings on cervical ROM required controlling weight or explicit good reasons for discounting | Commissioner: Biyani examined Reeves only once, did not provide an opinion on work-related limits, so not entitled to treating-source controlling weight | Court: No error—single consult visit not an ongoing treating relationship; Biyani gave no RFC opinion, so treating-source rule inapplicable |
| Whether ALJ improperly gave "great weight" to state agency medical and psychological consultants | Reeves: ALJ’s reliance was vague, internally inconsistent, and failed to account for limitations (e.g., balance, hazards, vibration, coworker/supervisor contact) | Commissioner: State consultants are experts; their opinions were supported by the record and ALJ permissibly adopted them in part without verbatim adoption | Court: No error—ALJ permissibly relied on state consultants; RFC incorporated supported limitations and did not have to adopt every opinion item verbatim |
| Whether ALJ failed to include limitations from lumbar/cervical spine, right hand, and mental impairments in RFC | Reeves: Dr. Diaz’s exam and other findings showed more restrictive limitations that the RFC omitted | Commissioner: ALJ gave Dr. Diaz only some weight because his opinion suggested possible malingering and recommended further evals; state consultants did not find disabling limits | Court: No error—ALJ reasonably discounted unsupported or speculative limitations and included credibly established restrictions; RFC supported by substantial evidence |
Key Cases Cited
- Valley v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 427 F.3d 388 (6th Cir. 2005) (standard of de novo review of district court decision)
- White v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 572 F.3d 272 (6th Cir. 2009) (court reviews whether ALJ applied correct legal standards and whether findings are supported by substantial evidence)
- Richardson v. Perales, 402 U.S. 389 (Sup. Ct. 1971) (definition of substantial evidence standard)
- Blakley v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 581 F.3d 399 (6th Cir. 2009) (failure to follow agency rules can denote lack of substantial evidence)
- Ealy v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 594 F.3d 504 (6th Cir. 2010) (treating-source rule and who qualifies as a treating source)
- Smith v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 482 F.3d 873 (6th Cir. 2007) (single examination does not make physician a treating source)
- Wilson v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 378 F.3d 541 (6th Cir. 2004) (requirements for discounting treating-source opinions)
- Rogers v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 486 F.3d 234 (6th Cir. 2007) (factors for weighing treating-source opinions)
- Hoskins v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 106 F. App’x 412 (6th Cir. 2004) (state agency medical consultants may be given greater weight when supported)