Dudley v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration, 2:16-cv-00682

Plaintiff Barbara J. Dudley applied for DIB and SSI alleging disability beginning September 1, 2014; ALJ denied benefits on Feb. 3, 2016 and Appeals Council denied review.
Hearing testimony: chronic low back pain, social avoidance, limited activities, recent start of mental health counseling, past work as cashier/stock clerk and packager.
Mental health records: primary care refill of Celexa (April 2014); consultative psychologist Dr. Swearingen (Feb. 2015) diagnosed major depressive disorder and PTSD, observed blunted affect, shaking, slowed psychomotor signs, borderline/low-average functioning and opined moderate workplace limitations.
State agency reviewers: Dr. Tishler (initial) found severe mental impairments and work-environment restrictions; Dr. Jenkins (reconsideration) recorded severe affective and anxiety disorders but stated insufficient evidence to assess functional limitations due to lack of contact with claimant/rep.
ALJ found severe physical impairments (knee osteoarthritis, lumbar degenerative disc disease), concluded mental impairments were nonsevere, gave little weight to examining and some state-agency opinions, and found claimant capable of past relevant work (packager) at medium exertion.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the ALJ erred by finding Plaintiff's mental impairments nonsevere and assigning no work-related mental limitations	Dudley: ALJ improperly discounted Dr. Swearingen and Dr. Tishler; Dr. Jenkins also found severe disorders; the record supports at least some mental limitations	Commissioner: ALJ permissibly discounted those opinions as based largely on subjective reports and inconsistent with daily activities; any error on Dr. Jenkins point was harmless because ALJ proceeded on severe physical impairments	Court: Reversed and remanded — ALJ erred by failing to find severe mental impairments supported by the record and by rejecting examining and state-agency opinions without adequate basis; error was not harmless because no mental limitations were included in the RFC

Richardson v. Perales, 402 U.S. 389 (discusses substantial evidence standard)
Consolidated Edison Co. v. NLRB, 305 U.S. 197 (definition of substantial evidence)
Universal Camera Corp. v. NLRB, 340 U.S. 474 (court must consider evidence that detracts from administrative findings)
LeMaster v. Weinberger, 533 F.2d 337 (scope of substantial-evidence review)
Harris v. Heckler, 756 F.2d 431 (administrative decision must consider whole record)
Beavers v. Secretary of Health, Education & Welfare, 577 F.2d 383 (courts must weigh detracting record evidence)
Kinsella v. Schweiker, 708 F.2d 1058 (affirmance appropriate where ALJ supported by substantial evidence)
Maziarz v. Secretary of HHS, 837 F.2d 240 (harmless-error framework in Social Security cases)
Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (procedures for review of magistrate judge recommendations)
United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (failure to object to magistrate report waives appellate review)