McLeod v. Astrue
2011 WL 1886355
| 9th Cir. | 2010Background
- McLeod applied for supplemental security income at age 51; ALJ found three impairments but none listed and found credibility partial, limiting work to sedentary jobs; district court denied review.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| ALJ duties to develop VA rating in record | McLeod argues ALJ should have sought VA rating | ALJ had no duty to request VA rating absent ambiguity | ALJ erred by not obtaining VA rating; remand required |
| Effect of treating physicians on employability | Rossetto/opinions should be given weight on employability | Physician opinions not binding on disability determination | No duty to recontact absent ambiguity; error not shown on this issue |
| Harmless-error framework to SSA under Sanders | Prejudice from missing VA rating must be shown | Remand not always required; standard confined to prejudice | Sanders applies; due to likely prejudice, remand to develop VA rating is appropriate |
Key Cases Cited
- Tonapetyan v. Halter, 242 F.3d 1144 (9th Cir. 2001) (duty to inquire when record is inadequate or ambiguous)
- McCartey v. Massanari, 298 F.3d 1072 (9th Cir. 2002) (VA rating must be considered; may be given great weight)
- Shinseki v. Sanders, U.S. , 129 S. Ct. 1696 (2009) (harmless-error standard; prejudice required to reverse)
- Smolen v. Chater, 80 F.3d 1273 (9th Cir. 1996) (treating physician opinions and evaluation process)
- Stout v. Comm'r, Soc. Sec. Admin., 454 F.3d 1050 (9th Cir. 2006) (harmless error in SSA context)