525 F. App'x 461
7th Cir.2013Background
- Burnam, age 36, applied for Supplemental Security Income in December 2006 alleging disabling herniated disc and severe headaches from 2000–2008.
- She had a prior partial work history (1995–2000) and, after applying, worked several part‑time jobs, affecting SSI eligibility.
- The SSA denied the claim; an ALJ held a July 2009 hearing and concluded the impairments were severe but not disabling, then denied benefits.
- Medical history includes a 2002 back pain onset after a fall, 2006 MRI showing a large central disc herniation, and lumbosacral radiculopathy with conservative treatment.
- Dr. Sowade, Burnam’s treating physician, issued a 2009 residual functional capacity assessment more restrictively, which the ALJ largely rejected in favor of other medical evidence and Burnam’s conservative treatment.
- The VE identified three sedentary jobs Burnam could perform, provided breaks and other limitations were observed; the ALJ found Burnam not disabled.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Credibility of Burnam's pain testimony | Burnam's pain testimony should be fully credited as disabling. | ALJ properly discounted pain based on record evidence and conservative treatment. | AFFIRMED; credibility supported by substantial evidence. |
| Weight given to treating physician's assessment | Dr. Sowade’s restrictive findings deserved greater weight. | ALJ properly weighed Sowade against other evidence and conservative care was consistent with ability to work. | AFFIRMED; ALJ rationally discounted Sowade. |
| Reliability of VE and job availability | Available jobs exist for someone with Burnam's impairments. | VE testimony, with sedentary options and break limitations, supports no-disability determination. | AFFIRMED; three sedentary jobs supported by VE. |
Key Cases Cited
- Myles v. Astrue, 582 F.3d 672 (7th Cir. 2009) (requires articulation of reasons for discrediting pain testimony)
- Villano v. Astrue, 556 F.3d 558 (7th Cir. 2009) (pain testimony credibility standards)
- Castile v. Astrue, 617 F.3d 923 (7th Cir. 2010) (avoid nitpicking errors in ALJ decisions)
- Shramek v. Apfel, 226 F.3d 809 (7th Cir. 2000) (rejects trivial appellate critiques of ALJ findings)
- Elder v. Astrue, 529 F.3d 408 (7th Cir. 2008) (standard of review for ALJ determinations)
- Chenery Corp. v. sec, 318 U.S. 80 (S. Ct. 1943) (decision-makers must rely on substantial evidence in record)
- Scott v. Astrue, 647 F.3d 734 (7th Cir. 2011) (limits de novo review to ALJ rationales)