Pierce v. Astrue
1:11-cv-00447
N.D. Ill.Feb 14, 2012Background
- Claimant applied for DIB and SSI on December 11, 2006, alleging disability beginning May 1, 2006.
- ALJ hearing occurred October 23, 2008 with medical expert Dr. Torczynski and vocational expert Frank Mendrick.
- ALJ issued a partially favorable decision April 16, 2009: not disabled through date last insured (Dec. 31, 2007), disabled from Feb. 1, 2008 for SSI.
- Date last insured for DIB was December 31, 2007, creating a gap before Claimant’s asserted disability onset.
- ALJ awarded SSI benefits but denied DIB; Appeals Council denied review; case proceeded to federal court for review.
- Court remands the case for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Onset date determination for disability | Pierce argues SSR 83-20 requires medical expert input to infer onset. | Astrue contends no expert input was necessary due to sparse pre-2008 record. | Remand to obtain medical expert on onset date. |
| Credibility of Claimant's testimony | Pierce challenges the ALJ’s credibility assessment. | Astrue defends the credibility finding as supported by inconsistencies. | Credibility findings sustained; remand does not negate them but allows review. |
Key Cases Cited
- Thomas v. Astrue, 352 F. App’x 115 (7th Cir. 2009) (disability onset guidance under SSR 83-20; distinguishable facts)
- Lichter v. Bowen, 814 F.2d 403 (7th Cir. 1987) (onset date is not limited to diagnosis date; onset requires medical basis)
- Briscoe v. Barnhart, 425 F.3d 345 (7th Cir. 2005) (SSR 83-20 and onset inference principles applied)
- Barnett v. Barnhart, 381 F.3d 664 (7th Cir. 2004) (medical opinion needed for listings/equivalence)
- Thomas v. Astrue, 352 F. App’x 115 (7th Cir. 2009) (see above (duplicate entry in text))
- Castile v. Astrue, 617 F.3d 923 (7th Cir. 2010) (credibility and medical evidence considerations)
- Craft v. Astrue, 539 F.3d 668 (7th Cir. 2008) (deference to ALJ credibility findings; minimal articulation required)
- Berger v. Astrue, 516 F.3d 539 (7th Cir. 2008) (requirement to articulate reasoning for disability determinations)
- McKinzey v. Astrue, 641 F.3d 884 (7th Cir. 2011) (substantial evidence standard and review)