Jennifer Grimm Cherkaoui v. Commissioner of Social Security
678 F. App'x 902
| 11th Cir. | 2017Background
- Jennifer Grimm Cherkaoui appealed the district court’s affirmance of the SSA’s denial of her application for Supplemental Security Income (SSI).
- Cherkaoui argued (1) frequent medical appointments for multiple ailments made her unemployable and (2) the ALJ gave improper weight to treating physician Dr. Tse Lee’s opinion.
- The ALJ found Cherkaoui had the residual functional capacity (RFC) for sedentary work and found her symptom allegations not fully credible based on mostly benign medical evidence, daily activities, and inconsistent reports to doctors.
- The ALJ did not treat the number of medical appointments as an RFC limitation because SSR 96-8p confines RFC to functional limitations caused by medically determinable impairments.
- On appeal, the Eleventh Circuit reviewed for substantial evidence and proper legal standards and considered whether Cherkaoui abandoned her argument about Dr. Lee’s opinion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether frequent medical appointments render claimant disabled | Appellant: too many appointments would require absences making employment impossible | SSA: number of appointments is not a functional limitation from an impairment and does not show work-preclusive RFC | Court: Not a proper RFC consideration; affirm ALJ’s sedentary-RFC finding |
| Credibility of claimant’s symptom allegations | Appellant: symptoms and treatment schedule limit work | SSA: medical record largely benign, daily activities, inconsistent statements undermine credibility | Court: ALJ’s credibility evaluation supported by substantial evidence |
| Weight given to treating physician Dr. Lee’s opinion | Appellant: ALJ improperly rejected/failed to assign proper weight to Dr. Lee (raised on appeal) | SSA: ALJ permissibly evaluated medical opinions (implicit) | Court: Argument abandoned on appeal (insufficiently briefed); not reached |
| Standard of review—substantial evidence | Appellant: ALJ erred in assessing evidence and RFC | SSA: ALJ’s decision supported by substantial evidence | Court: Reviewed under substantial-evidence standard and affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Crawford v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 363 F.3d 1155 (11th Cir. 2004) (defines substantial-evidence review for Social Security decisions)
- Dyer v. Barnhart, 395 F.3d 1206 (11th Cir. 2005) (court may not reweigh evidence; must defer if supported by substantial evidence)
- Ellison v. Barnhart, 355 F.3d 1272 (11th Cir. 2003) (claimant bears burden of proving disability)
- Sapuppo v. Allstate Floridian Ins. Co., 739 F.3d 678 (11th Cir. 2014) (issues raised perfunctorily or in passing are abandoned)
- SEC v. Big Apple Consulting USA, Inc., 783 F.3d 786 (11th Cir. 2015) (brief, unsupported references are insufficient to preserve an appellate claim)