87 F.4th 853
7th Cir.2023Background
- Tutwiler (b. 1973) treated for endometrial cancer and radiation-related gastrointestinal problems (nausea, vomiting, diarrhea); also had hernia repair, cholecystectomy, weight loss, depression, asthma, and history of substance use.
- GI symptoms progressively impaired her work attendance/performance; she lost full-time hours and was eventually fired.
- In May 2019 she applied for DIB and SSI; state agency denied; ALJ held a hearing with claimant and a vocational expert.
- ALJ found severe impairments (hernia surgeries, GI problems, asthma, depression), but determined no listing was met and assessed an RFC for sedentary work with limits (occasional stairs/kneel/crouch; no ladders/ropes; avoid extreme temperatures; no fast-paced assembly-line work).
- At step five the ALJ (relying on the VE) found several sedentary jobs available in significant numbers; therefore Tutwiler was not disabled. District court affirmed; Tutwiler appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Forfeiture of arguments not raised below | Tutwiler says ALJ failed to account for weight loss, drug use, and mental limits in RFC | Commissioner says these issues were not raised in district court and thus forfeited on appeal | Court: Forfeited — only GI argument preserved; appellant cannot raise new RFC theories on appeal |
| RFC adequacy re: GI symptoms | ALJ ignored/"cherry-picked" medical evidence and claimant testimony about constant, disabling GI symptoms | ALJ weighed conflicting evidence, noted improvement in some records, and limited RFC accordingly | Court: ALJ’s RFC supported by substantial evidence; no legal error |
| Credibility of claimant testimony | Tutwiler says her testimony about symptoms was credible and relied on by VE | ALJ found inconsistencies (medical records showing improvement, daily activities, prior drug use denial) undermining credibility | Court: ALJ’s credibility findings not patently wrong and adequately supported by multiple factors |
| Objective medical evidence & vocational impact (absenteeism/off-task) | Medical records show persistent symptoms that would cause >1 absence/month or >10% off-task, eliminating competitive work | Commissioner: Records are mixed; some 2019–2020 notes show improvement; no treating opinion imposing greater limits | Court: Evidence ambiguous; ALJ reasonably balanced it; no contrary medical opinion compels reversal |
Key Cases Cited
- Gedatus v. Saul, 994 F.3d 893 (7th Cir. 2021) (standard of review—substantial evidence/deference to ALJ)
- O'Connor-Spinner v. Astrue, 627 F.3d 614 (7th Cir. 2010) (ALJ must build a logical bridge linking evidence to conclusions)
- Biestek v. Berryhill, 139 S. Ct. 1148 (2019) (definition and scope of substantial evidence)
- Arnett v. Astrue, 676 F.3d 586 (7th Cir. 2012) (preservation of RFC arguments when district- and appellate-level claims are substantially similar)
- United States v. Sheth, 924 F.3d 425 (7th Cir. 2019) (forfeiture of issues not raised below)
- Craft v. Astrue, 539 F.3d 668 (7th Cir. 2008) (credibility review: "patently wrong" standard)
- Bates v. Colvin, 736 F.3d 1093 (7th Cir. 2013) (upholding credibility findings despite some flawed reasons)
- McClesky v. Astrue, 606 F.3d 351 (7th Cir. 2010) (ALJ may consider false statements about drug use in credibility assessment)
- Deborah M. v. Saul, 994 F.3d 785 (7th Cir. 2021) (claimant must identify evidence that compels a contrary result to warrant reversal)