Hamedallah ex rel. E.B. v. Astrue
2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 87403
N.D.N.Y.2012Background
- Plaintiff Christina Hamedallah seeks SSI review on behalf of her minor daughter E.B. under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).
- E.B. applied for SSI on August 8, 2008; application denied February 23, 2009; hearing held November 16, 2010; ALJ issued January 21, 2011 denial.
- Appeals Council denied review June 13, 2011, making the ALJ’s decision the Commissioner’s final decision; plaintiff filed suit in district court.
- Medical history: in utero traumatic brain injury with seizure history and cognitive delays; IQ tests around 65–67 on some instruments; history of phonological disorder and anxiety.
- School records show multiple IEPs from 2008–2011 with evolving services; 2010–2011 IEP recommended reduced special education and continued speech/social services.
- ALJ found six domains with less-than-marked limitations and concluded E.B. was not disabled; court remanded to address listing §112.05 and domain analyses, and consider all medical opinions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did the ALJ improperly weight treating/consulting opinions? | Rigberg opinion should have controlling weight. | Regulations do not grant treating-physician weight to consulting doctors. | Remand needed for proper evaluation of medical opinions. |
| Did the ALJ err in not finding Listing 112.05D/E or functional equivalence? | E.B.’s IQ in 60–70 range with multiple impairments meets 112.05D/E. | Record does not show impairment meets or equals 112.05; IQ alone insufficient. | Remand required to address whether 112.05D/E is satisfied, with more record development. |
| Did the ALJ properly analyze functional domains and rely on incomplete record? | ALJ ignored 2010–2011 IEP and treating opinions showing deficits. | ALJ supported by teacher questionnaires and prior IEPs; improvements noted. | Remand to comprehensively assess six domains and consider full record evidence. |
| Was the credibility assessment of the mother/stepfather adequately explained? | Parents’ testimony supports greater limitations; credibility unresolved. | ALJ properly weighed credibility against medical and school records. | Court affirmed ALJ’s credibility assessment; no remand on credibility alone. |
Key Cases Cited
- Snell v. Apfel, 177 F.3d 128 (2d Cir. 1999) (cannot substitute post hoc rationalizations for agency action)
- Pollard v. Halter, 377 F.3d 183 (2d Cir. 2004) (functional equivalence framework for listing impairments)
- Morgan on Behalf of Morgan v. Chater, 913 F.Supp. 184 (N.D.N.Y.1996) (one-sentence denial insufficient; require detailed rationale)
- Hall ex rel. Lee v. Apfel, 122 F.Supp.2d 959 (N.D.Ill.2000) (remand where misapplication of 112.05 and inadequate discussion)