Keith Brunson v. Commissioner Social Security
704 F. App'x 56
| 3rd Cir. | 2017Background
- Brunson injured his left shoulder in 2006 and later his right shoulder; he delayed or declined some treatments and had gaps in care, including noncompliance with post-op physical therapy after right shoulder arthroscopy in 2013.
- He applied for Social Security disability insurance benefits in March 2012; initial consultative exam by Dr. Harris Ross reported limited range of motion but normal reflexes and grip; Ross’s Medical Source Statement (MSS) included severe functional limitations but lacked supporting findings.
- State agency reviewer Dr. Sharon A. Wander, after record review, concluded Brunson could perform light work and found Ross’s restrictions overstated and based largely on subjective complaints.
- Treating surgeon Dr. Brian Sennett completed MSS forms in 2013 asserting severe limitations but provided minimal supporting rationale and his own treatment notes showed post-surgical improvement.
- An ALJ found Brunson had severe impairments but retained the residual functional capacity (RFC) for light work, credited Dr. Wander over Drs. Sennett and Ross, discounted Brunson’s credibility based on treatment gaps, objective findings, and daily activities, and relied on a vocational expert to find jobs available.
- The Appeals Council denied review; the District Court affirmed the ALJ (via Magistrate Judge recommendation); Brunson appealed to the Third Circuit.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether ALJ’s RFC finding is supported by substantial evidence | Brunson: ALJ improperly credited non-treating state-reviewer (Dr. Wander) over treating (Dr. Sennett) and consultative examiner (Dr. Ross); ALJ misweighed qualifications and discounted his pain testimony | Commissioner: ALJ permissibly weighed conflicting medical opinions, gave less weight to treating/consultative opinions because they lacked support or conflicted with record; credited state consultant as consistent with evidence; credibility finding supported | Affirmed: ALJ’s RFC and credibility determinations are supported by substantial evidence; state reviewer appropriately credited |
| Whether ALJ erred in rejecting treating physician opinion | Brunson: Dr. Sennett’s treating status requires controlling weight | Commissioner: Treating opinion was unsupported, inconsistent with other evidence and patient’s activities, so ALJ properly discounted it | Affirmed: ALJ may reject unsupported/inconsistent treating opinion |
| Whether ALJ erred in discounting claimant’s subjective testimony | Brunson: ALJ improperly discounted his reports of pain/limitations | Commissioner: ALJ cited conservative treatment, improvement after surgery, treatment gaps, inconsistent objective findings, and daily activities to support credibility finding | Affirmed: Credibility determination supported by substantial evidence |
| Whether state agency consultant’s opinion is per se insufficient because not a treating specialist | Brunson: Dr. Wander’s non-treating, non-specialist status undermines weight | Commissioner: State agency medical consultants are qualified experts; specialty is only one factor and ALJ may rely on consistent consultant opinion | Affirmed: State agency consultant was a qualified expert and her opinion could be relied upon |
Key Cases Cited
- Krysztoforski v. Chater, 55 F.3d 857 (3d Cir. 1995) (standard of review on legal questions)
- Chandler v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 667 F.3d 356 (3d Cir. 2011) (ALJ may rely on state agency medical consultant when consistent with record)
- Plummer v. Apfel, 186 F.3d 422 (3d Cir. 1999) (requirements to show disability and evaluation of claimant testimony)
- Fargnoli v. Massanari, 247 F.3d 34 (3d Cir. 2001) (treating physician opinion may be rejected if unsupported/inconsistent)
- Brown v. Astrue, 649 F.3d 193 (3d Cir. 2011) (ALJ may weigh conflicting medical evidence and draw inferences)
- Hartranft v. Apfel, 181 F.3d 358 (3d Cir. 1999) (definition of substantial evidence)
- Pierce v. Underwood, 487 U.S. 552 (U.S. 1988) (definition of substantial evidence)
- Reefer v. Barnhart, 326 F.3d 376 (3d Cir. 2003) (credibility determinations supported by substantial evidence)