Johnson v. Astrue
2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 24833
| 8th Cir. | 2010Background
- Johnson, 34, suffers from anxiety, OCD, and borderline intellectual functioning; only work history is limited to errands at his father's law office.
- He has a long treatment history with various clinics since 1994; IQ testing was not completed by Dr. McDonald, who estimated IQ 80 or above.
- Johnson applied for SSI on Feb 22, 2006; ALJ found program did not meet Listing 12.05 and awarded no disability since 2006 onset date.
- The district court affirmed; the Eighth Circuit reviews for substantial evidence and upholds the Commissioner’s decision.
- ALJ found a residual functional capacity for simple unskilled and low semi-skilled work with concrete instructions and superficial contact.
- VE testified such an individual could work as a material handler or hand packer; Johnson challenged the ALJ’s step-three and step-five determinations.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether ALJ properly evaluated Listing 12.05 for mental retardation | Johnson argues ALJ should have recontacted for IQ testing. | Johnson contends IQ estimate insufficient to reject 12.05C. | ALJ did not err; record supported reliance on IQ estimate and no reversible error to recontact. |
| Whether ALJ failed to obtain a full IQ test when discrepancies existed | Discrepant IQ scores and adaptive deficits require recontacting for full testing. | Record reasonably developed; no need for additional testing. | No reversible error; IQ testing deemed sufficiently developed for decision. |
| Whether the RFC and hypothetical to the VE adequately described Johnson's limitations | Johnson's actual limitations are greater than described. | RFC limits reflect evidence; VE provided compatible job options. | RFC and VE testimony supported by substantial evidence; finding affirmed. |
| Whether substantial evidence supports the step-five denial of disability | ALJ's limitations too restrictive; alternative jobs not properly identified. | Given RFC, jobs like material handler and hand packer exist. | Yes; substantial evidence supports the step-five denial. |
Key Cases Cited
- Snead v. Barnhart, 360 F.3d 834 (8th Cir. 2004) (ALJ duty to fully develop the record)
- Ellis v. Barnhart, 392 F.3d 988 (8th Cir. 2005) (ALJ should recontact if critical issue is undeveloped)
- Barrett v. Shalala, 38 F.3d 1019 (8th Cir. 1994) (medical evidence sufficiency to determine disability)
- Wiese v. Astrue, 552 F.3d 728 (8th Cir. 2009) (de novo review for substantial evidence; not reweighing evidence)
- Kluesner v. Astrue, 607 F.3d 533 (8th Cir. 2010) (substantial evidence standard; upholds Commissioner's decision)