Bradley v. Colvin (previously Astrue)
2:12-cv-00146
E.D. Wash.Jul 31, 2013Background
- Bradley sought SSI benefits, arguing disability beginning 11/26/2009; the ALJ denied, Appeals Council denied review; district court reviewed cross-motions for summary judgment; court grants defendant’s motion and denies plaintiff’s; final decision affirmed; issues concern treating and psychological evidence and listing 1.04A.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the treating physician’s listing claim was properly evaluated | Bradley meets or equals listing 1.04A | Sikora’s opinion unsupported; records contradict it | No; not met or equaled listing 1.04A. |
| Whether the ALJ properly rejected Dr. Pollack’s opinion | Pollack’s opinion shows moderate to severe limitations | ALJ properly rejected due to malingering signs in testing | Yes; ALJ’s rejection supported by substantial evidence. |
Key Cases Cited
- Hill v. Astrue, 698 F.3d 1153 (9th Cir. 2012) (scope of substantial evidence review under § 405(g))
- Molina v. Astrue, 674 F.3d 1104 (9th Cir. 2012) (court must uphold inferences reasonably drawn from record)
- Shinseki v. Sanders, 556 U.S. 396 (Supreme Court 2009) (harmless error doctrine in SSA review)
- Bray v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 554 F.3d 1219 (9th Cir. 2009) (treating/examining physician opinions require substantial support)
- Bayliss v. Barnhart, 427 F.3d 1211 (9th Cir. 2005) (clear and convincing reasons for rejecting treating/opinion)
- Lester v. Chater, 81 F.3d 821 (9th Cir. 1995) (rejection of medical opinions must be specific and legitimate)
- Tackett v. Apfel, 180 F.3d 1094 (9th Cir. 1999) (how to evaluate medical equivalence for listings)
- Gomez v. Chater, 74 F.3d 967 (9th Cir. 1996) (consideration of new evidence by Appeals Council)
- Brewes v. Commissioner of Social Sec., 682 F.3d 1157 (9th Cir. 2012) (evidence relating to period before ALJ decision)