Davenport v. Astrue
6:12-cv-06238
W.D.N.Y.Jul 15, 2013Background
- Davenport filed for DIB and SSI in 2008 alleging disability from 2008-01-01 after a 2007 bus accident; denial followed in 2009.
- ALJ hearing held 2010-06-03 before ALJ James E. Dombeck; Appeals Council denied review in 2012, final decision to deny benefits.
- Plaintiff, age 38 at hearing, with high school education and one year of college; past work as a caterer.
- Plaintiff alleged back pain, obesity, asthma, and depression; MRIs showed mild L5-S1 degeneration with no nerve compression; treatment largely conservative.
- ALJ found plaintiff had a residual functional capacity for light work with simple, entry-level requirements and found other work existed in the national economy; Commissioner’s decision affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether RFC is supported by substantial evidence | Davenport contends RFC fails to reflect limitations. | Colvin argues RFC supported by medical record and expert opinions. | RFC properly supported by substantial evidence. |
| Credibility of Davenport's subjective complaints | Davenport argues ALJ biased against her testimony. | Colvin asserts credibility supported by inconsistency with record and lack of objective support. | Credibility properly assessed. |
| Weight given to treating and consultative sources | Davenport argues treating NP Berrios and Dr. Toor should be given significant weight. | Colvin places greater weight on examining physicians and non-treating sources. | ALJ properly weighed sources and discounted less reliable opinions. |
| Need for Vocational Expert | A VE should have been consulted for nonexertional limits. | VE not required given RFC and unassuming nonexertional impact. | No VE necessary; guidelines applied appropriately. |
Key Cases Cited
- Berry v. Schweiker, 675 F.2d 464 (2d Cir. 1982) (disability framework and substantial evidence standards)
- Genier v. Astrue, 298 F. App’x 105 (2d Cir. 2008) (treatment vs. other medical sources; weighing opinions)
- Veino v. Barnhart, 312 F.3d 578 (2d Cir. 2002) (conflicts in medical evidence resolved by the Commissioner)
- Bapp v. Bowen, 802 F.2d 601 (2d Cir. 1986) (nonexertional impairments and applicability of guidelines)
- Richardson v. Perales, 402 U.S. 389 (U.S. 1971) (definition of substantial evidence and judicial review standard)