Sherry Despain v. Nancy A. Berryhill
926 F.3d 1024
8th Cir.2019Background
- Despain, a 52-year-old former packaging machine operator, applied for SSDI alleging disability beginning May 4, 2015, due to chronic pain and obesity.
- SSA denied benefits; an ALJ found six severe impairments (obesity, bilateral knee osteoarthritis, lumbar degenerative disc disease, pes planus, anxiety, depression) but determined they did not meet or equal a Listing.
- ALJ assessed an RFC for light work with sit/stand-at-will, no ladders/ropes/scaffolds, occasional ramps/stairs/stooping/kneeling/crouching/crawling, no lower-extremity foot controls, and restriction to unskilled SVP 1–2 jobs learnable within 30 days.
- Treating physician Dr. Crawley completed a 2016 Medical Source Statement imposing substantial limitations (limited lifting, limited sitting/standing hours, frequent rests, inability to sustain full-time work, medication-related concentration issues, ~3 absences/month), but left supporting findings blank.
- ALJ discounted parts of Dr. Crawley’s conclusory opinion as unsupported by the medical record and relied on treatment notes, imaging (mild degenerative changes, small herniation), physical therapy records, and state-agency consultants to support the RFC.
- Appeals Council denied review; district court affirmed; this panel reviews whether the ALJ’s RFC determination and treatment-of-treating-physician analysis are supported by substantial evidence and affirms.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the ALJ improperly discounted the treating physician’s opinion and thus erred in formulating the RFC | Despain argued the ALJ gave inadequate deference to Dr. Crawley and the RFC is unsupported by the record | The Commissioner argued Dr. Crawley’s Medical Source Statement was conclusory and unsupported by objective findings; the RFC is supported by treatment records, imaging, PT notes, and state consultants | The court held the ALJ properly discounted the conclusory treating opinion where unsupported by the record and adopted RFC supported by substantial evidence |
Key Cases Cited
- Ash v. Colvin, 812 F.3d 686 (standard of substantial evidence review in SSA appeals)
- McNamara v. Astrue, 590 F.3d 607 (same)
- McKinney v. Apfel, 228 F.3d 860 (definition of substantial evidence)
- Goff v. Barnhart, 421 F.3d 785 (claimant bears burden to establish RFC)
- Vossen v. Astrue, 612 F.3d 1011 (treating physician opinions normally entitled to great weight)
- Prosch v. Apfel, 201 F.3d 1010 (treating physician deference doctrine)
- Miller v. Colvin, 784 F.3d 472 (treating opinion controlling if supported and consistent with record)
- Cunningham v. Apfel, 222 F.3d 496 (requirements for treating-source weight)
- Cox v. Astrue, 495 F.3d 614 (RFC is an administrative determination)
- Cox v. Barnhart, 345 F.3d 606 (conclusory treating opinions may be rejected if unsupported)
- Stormo v. Barnhart, 377 F.3d 801 (ALJ may discredit treating opinion unsupported by medical record)