Long v. Colvin
3:16-cv-50060
N.D. Ill.Apr 21, 2017Background
- Jessica Long applied for Social Security disability benefits alleging chronic panic attacks, fear of leaving home, and fear of large groups that prevent full-time work; ALJ held two hearings and issued a written decision denying benefits.
- Plaintiff reported long-standing anxiety since school, past full-time work (crew leader at Burger King), part-time telemarketing (2008–2010), caring for her ill mother (2011), and home hair-styling (2012); she testified to multiple daily panic attacks and limited outings.
- The ALJ found severe impairments including panic disorder (without agoraphobia), social phobia, generalized anxiety disorder, substance abuse in remission, dependent and schizoid personality disorder, and borderline intellectual functioning.
- ALJ concluded plaintiff did not meet Listings and assigned an RFC limiting her to 1–2 step routine tasks, no public interaction, and only infrequent-to-occasional interaction with coworkers/supervisors.
- Plaintiff argued the ALJ ignored a medical “consensus” that she could not work and improperly relied on her post-onset part-time work; the ALJ and government pointed to other medical opinions and inconsistencies in plaintiff’s reports.
- Magistrate Judge Iain D. Johnston affirmed the ALJ: he found no consensus among treating/consultative sources, substantial evidence supported the RFC and credibility findings, and consideration of non-full-time work was permissible.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether ALJ erred by ignoring a medical "consensus" that Long cannot work | Long: Several professionals indicate she will not improve and likely cannot work; ALJ overlooked that consensus | Gov: Record contains conflicting opinions (treating and state consults); no clear consensus and ALJ considered all relevant opinions | Court: No consensus; ALJ reasonably weighed conflicting evidence and relied on substantial contrary medical support |
| Whether ALJ improperly relied on part-time/post‑onset work to discredit disability | Long: Post‑onset telemarketing, home hair‑styling, and caregiving were non‑gainful/limited and should not detract from disability | Gov: Regulations and precedent permit consideration of part‑time work as probative of functional capacity | Court: ALJ permissibly considered these activities among other evidence; plaintiff conceded no categorical bar to using part‑time work |
| Whether ALJ’s credibility and RFC determinations were supported by substantial evidence | Long: ALJ misweighed evidence, overlooked limitations and ambiguous expert testimony favoring marked limitations | Gov: ALJ cited multiple medical opinions, inconsistencies in plaintiff’s reports, and nonmedical activities; ambiguous expert testimony does not establish error | Court: RFC and credibility findings supported by substantial evidence; remand for reweighing not warranted |
| Whether expert testimony (Dr. Carney) created a close call requiring remand | Long: Dr. Carney’s hedging shows uncertainty and supports remand | Gov: Carney’s testimony was equivocal and mixed; he did not definitively opine plaintiff was disabled | Court: Ambiguous testimony does not compel remand; ALJ reasonably resolved the close calls |
Key Cases Cited
- Berger v. Astrue, 516 F.3d 539 (7th Cir. 2008) (ability to perform some work weighs against claim of total disability)
- Goff v. Barnhart, 421 F.3d 785 (8th Cir. 2005) (part‑time work can demonstrate ability to perform substantial gainful employment)
- Harris v. Barnhart, 356 F.3d 926 (8th Cir. 2004) (part‑time work may be probative of ability to work)
- Alvarado v. Colvin, 836 F.3d 744 (7th Cir. 2016) (court must not reweigh evidence or substitute its judgment for ALJ’s)