Cydnee Hardison v. Nancy Berryhill
703 F. App'x 513
| 9th Cir. | 2017Background
- Cyndee Lyn Hardison appealed the district court’s affirmance of an ALJ denial of Supplemental Security Income under Title XVI of the Social Security Act.
- The Ninth Circuit has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and reviews the decision de novo.
- The Commissioner initially failed to file the transcript of Hardison’s July 26, 2011 ALJ hearing in the district-court administrative record; Hardison argued prejudice from that omission.
- The ALJ made an adverse credibility finding in the course of assessing Hardison’s adult residual functional capacity (RFC) and relied on adult findings in addressing childhood-benefits eligibility.
- The Ninth Circuit found the ALJ’s adverse credibility determination lacked specific, clear, and convincing reasons supported by substantial evidence and identified multiple faulty bases for discounting Hardison’s testimony.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Commissioner’s late filing of hearing transcript prejudiced Hardison | Late production disadvantaged Hardison and affected her appeal | No substantial-rights prejudice from delay | No prejudice shown; Hardison failed to identify affected substantial rights |
| Whether Hardison waived challenge to ALJ credibility finding regarding childhood benefits | Hardison preserved challenge to credibility for both child and adult claims | ALJ’s RFC-based credibility related to adult determination only | No waiver; challenge covers both child and adult claims |
| Whether ALJ gave specific, clear, convincing reasons supported by substantial evidence to reject symptom testimony | ALJ’s reasons were insufficient and unsupported | ALJ relied on daily activities, travel, missed appointments, witness inconsistency, and objective evidence | Rejected: ALJ’s credibility finding lacked required specificity and support |
| Remedy: whether remand for benefits or for further proceedings | Hardison argued errors required benefit award | Commissioner argued factual issues remain and remand is appropriate | Remand for further proceedings; not an immediate award of benefits |
Key Cases Cited
- Ghanim v. Colvin, 763 F.3d 1154 (9th Cir. 2014) (standard of de novo review for appeals of ALJ decisions)
- Ludwig v. Astrue, 681 F.3d 1047 (9th Cir. 2012) (party claiming procedural error must show it affected substantial rights)
- Garrison v. Colvin, 759 F.3d 995 (9th Cir. 2014) (requiring specific, clear, and convincing reasons to reject claimant testimony)
- Orn v. Astrue, 495 F.3d 625 (9th Cir. 2007) (daily activities and treatment gaps must be properly connected to work ability)
- Tommasetti v. Astrue, 533 F.3d 1035 (9th Cir. 2008) (extended independent travel can support adverse credibility inference)
- Thomas v. Barnhart, 278 F.3d 947 (9th Cir. 2002) (ALJ must link objective medical evidence to credibility findings)
- Treichler v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 775 F.3d 1090 (9th Cir. 2014) (where factual issues remain, remand for further proceedings is appropriate)