JARRELL v. ASTRUE
1:10-cv-00137
N.D. Fla.Aug 30, 2011Background
- Plaintiff filed for disability benefits in 1985; benefits were awarded in 1986 based on depressive syndrome.
- Continuing disability reviews occurred in 1989, 1990, and 1997; in 1997 the Commissioner found medical improvement and cessation of benefits effective July 1, 1997.
- Plaintiff challenged the July 1, 1997 cessation; subsequent ALJ decisions and multiple remands followed, focusing on mental impairments and residual functional capacity.
- The controlling issue in this review is whether, as of CPD (January 17, 1990), Plaintiff met Listing 12.04 or whether medical improvement related to work occurred by July 1, 1997.
- ALJ Jones’ second decision (2008) concluded Plaintiff did not meet Listing 12.04 as of July 1, 1997 and that medical improvement related to work occurred, enabling cessation.
- The district court's review is limited to substantial evidence supporting the 1997 cessation and the related RFC and VE-based determinations.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did ALJ correctly find 12.04 not met as of CPD? | Jarrell contends 12.04 remained met by July 1, 1997. | Astrue argues substantial evidence shows no two-marked limitations and no extended decompensation. | Yes; 12.04 not met as of July 1, 1997. |
| Was medical improvement related to ability to work? | Medical improvement did not relate to work capacity. | Improvement increased functional capacity and related to ability to work. | Yes; improvement related to work ability. |
| Is there substantial evidence supporting improvement as of July 1, 1997? | Records show persistent impairment similar to pre-1997 levels. | Record shows improved mood/functioning with less impairment and limited hospitalizations. | Yes; substantial evidence supports improvement by 1997. |
Key Cases Cited
- Edwards v. Sullivan, 937 F.2d 580 (11th Cir. 1991) (relevance of substantial evidence standard and deference to Commissioner)
- Foote v. Chater, 67 F.3d 1553 (11th Cir. 1995) (rejects post hoc rationalization; requires proper application of eight-step framework)
- Simpson v. Schweiker, 691 F.2d 966 (11th Cir. 1982) (burden to show error in disability decision; review of evidence as a whole)