Emily Coaty v. Carolyn Colvin
673 F. App'x 787
9th Cir.2017Background
- Emily Coaty, proceeding pro se, appealed the denial of her Title II disability insurance benefits to the Ninth Circuit after the district court affirmed the Commissioner's denial.
- The ALJ found Coaty not disabled, discounting her symptom testimony as not fully credible based on vagueness, inconsistent daily activities, and lack of objective medical corroboration.
- Rheumatologist W. Clay McCord provided a retrospective opinion (first treated Coaty in June 2011) asserting fibromyalgia caused disability beginning in 2007.
- The ALJ gave McCord’s retrospective opinion little weight as speculative, inconsistent with Coaty’s reported activities, and unsupported by contemporaneous medical records from the insured period.
- The Ninth Circuit reviewed the case de novo and concluded the ALJ’s adverse credibility finding and rejection of the retrospective treating opinion were supported by specific, clear, and convincing or specific and legitimate reasons and by substantial evidence.
- The court affirmed the Commissioner’s non-disability determination.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Credibility of symptom testimony | Coaty argued her testimony reflected disabling symptoms | Commissioner/ALJ argued testimony was vague, inconsistent with daily activities, and lacked objective support | ALJ’s adverse credibility finding upheld — specific, clear, convincing reasons supported by record |
| Weight given to treating rheumatologist’s retrospective opinion | McCord opined fibromyalgia caused disability beginning in 2007 | ALJ argued opinion was speculative, retrospective (first treated 2011), inconsistent with activities, and unsupported by contemporaneous records | ALJ properly gave little weight to McCord’s opinion; rejection supported by substantial evidence |
| Reliance on daily activities and objective findings | Coaty implicitly argued activities and records do not preclude disability | ALJ/Commissioner relied on inconsistencies between reported activities and alleged limits and lack of contemporaneous medical findings | Court held those factors were valid bases for adverse credibility and for discounting the retrospective opinion |
| Overall disability determination | Coaty contended she was disabled during the insured period | Commissioner maintained ALJ incorporated impairments and reasonably found non-disability based on the record | Ninth Circuit affirmed the ALJ’s non-disability determination as supported by substantial evidence |
Key Cases Cited
- Ghanim v. Colvin, 763 F.3d 1154 (9th Cir. 2014) (standard of review; credibility analysis principles)
- Molina v. Astrue, 674 F.3d 1104 (9th Cir. 2012) (inconsistency between daily activities and symptom testimony supports adverse credibility finding)
- Tommasetti v. Astrue, 533 F.3d 1035 (9th Cir. 2008) (ALJ may reject testimony where claimant is a vague witness about disability period and symptoms)
- Rollins v. Massanari, 261 F.3d 853 (9th Cir. 2001) (medical evidence is relevant to assessing pain testimony; inconsistencies with daily activities justify rejecting treating opinion)
- Tidwell v. Apfel, 161 F.3d 599 (9th Cir. 1999) (ALJ may reject retrospective opinion from a later treating physician when contradicted by contemporaneous evidence)
- Magallanes v. Bowen, 881 F.2d 747 (9th Cir. 1989) (substantial evidence standard and appraisal of administrative findings)
- Lewis v. Astrue, 498 F.3d 909 (9th Cir. 2007) (affirming non-disability where ALJ accounted for severe impairments at step four)