Joseph Hughes, III v. Carolyn Colvin
664 F. App'x 587
| 7th Cir. | 2016Background
- Plaintiff Joseph Hughes, 41, with longstanding ankylosing spondylitis and marked spinal fusion, applied for disability insurance benefits in 2011 claiming he could no longer work due to neck/back stiffness, reduced neck mobility, and fatigue.
- Medical records (2006–2013) show spinal fusion, progressive postural deterioration, limited neck range of motion, and variable assessments: treating rheumatologist Dr. Cohen described severe axial limitations but sometimes characterized disease activity as mild or stable; consultative and state-agency physicians offered mixed RFCs (light work vs reduced/sedentary limits).
- Hughes testified he could lift up to 50 lbs with frequent breaks, could sit/stand/walk 4–6 hours daily, needed a daily 15-minute nap, and had trouble affording prescribed biologic therapy.
- The ALJ found Hughes not disabled after step-four, concluding he retained RFC for light work with specific limits (e.g., avoid ladders, occasional crouching, alternative sit/stand, off-task up to 10%) and could perform past relevant work as retail manager and furniture salesman.
- The ALJ discounted portions of Hughes’s subjective testimony as not fully credible, citing non-prescription pain control, retained motor function, daily activities, job search/unemployment representations, and lack of documented worsening after his last employment.
- The Appeals Council denied review and the district court affirmed; the Seventh Circuit affirmed, holding the ALJ’s decision supported by substantial evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether ALJ failed to consider objective medical evidence before assessing credibility | ALJ ignored/discounted objective signs and relied on history and statements without adequate justification | ALJ reviewed x-rays, measurements, exam findings and considered objective evidence in RFC and credibility analysis | Rejected: ALJ adequately considered objective medical evidence |
| Whether ALJ improperly relied on prior work, job search, and unemployment to discredit symptoms | Working with disease earlier and seeking jobs/unemployment shows desire, not ability; disease worsened after last work | Representations of being ready/able to work and continued work-related activities are legitimate factors to assess credibility | Rejected: ALJ permissibly considered those facts as one credibility factor |
| Whether daily activities and testimony can support finding capable of 40-hour workweek | ALJ equated limited home activities with ability to sustain full-time competitive work | RFC accommodated breaks, alternative sit/stand, and off-task time; medical statements did not show disabling fatigue | Rejected: ALJ’s RFC addressed limitations and allowed reasonable breaks; substantial evidence supports conclusion |
| Whether ALJ erred by not addressing reasons for using OTC ibuprofen instead of prescription meds | Failure to consider claimant’s lack of funds and side-effect concerns when discounting conservative treatment was error | Omission harmless because ALJ gave other valid, supported reasons for credibility determination and record lacked evidence of marked decline | Rejected as reversible error: harmless; decision stands |
Key Cases Cited
- Varga v. Colvin, 794 F.3d 809 (7th Cir. 2015) (Appeals Council denial makes ALJ decision final)
- Curvin v. Colvin, 778 F.3d 645 (7th Cir. 2015) (standards for evaluating symptoms and credibility)
- Schmidt v. Barnhart, 395 F.3d 737 (7th Cir. 2005) (claimant’s statements to state agencies about ability to work are relevant to credibility)
- Beardsley v. Colvin, 758 F.3d 834 (7th Cir. 2014) (caution in equating daily activities with ability to sustain full-time work)
- Elder v. Astrue, 529 F.3d 408 (7th Cir. 2008) (credibility findings must not be patently wrong)
- Pepper v. Colvin, 712 F.3d 351 (7th Cir. 2013) (harmless-error doctrine in social-security credibility and opinion-evidence context)