Tenesha Reed v. Carolyn W. Colvin, 779 F.3d 725

Reed appealed denial of disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income, arguing she met Listing 12.05C (mild intellectual disability).
2007 WAIS-III testing by Dr. Kenneth Hobby produced verbal IQ 68, performance IQ 67, full-scale IQ 65; Dr. Hobby diagnosed mild mental retardation and found no signs of malingering in 2007.
Dr. Hobby re-evaluated Reed in 2010, noted some test results (number recall) inconsistent with 2007 scores and suggested possible malingering on that test; he described functioning as borderline/upper mild intellectual disability but did not plainly invalidate the 2007 results.
The ALJ found Reed’s impairments did not meet or equal a listing, characterized her cognitive level as borderline intellectual functioning (IQ 71–84), and relied in part on Dr. Hobby’s 2010 comments and Reed’s work history (medium unskilled work 2003–2009).
The record contained evidence Reed’s intellectual deficits manifested before age 22 (special education, repeated grades, learning difficulties) and that additional severe impairments (anxiety disorder, hand surgery history, morbid obesity) imposed significant work-related limitations.
The Eighth Circuit concluded the ALJ’s determination was not supported by substantial evidence and remanded for further development focused on the validity of the 2007 IQ test results.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Reed met Listing 12.05C	2007 IQ scores (65–68) satisfy Listing 12.05C; adaptive deficits before age 22 and additional severe impairments present	ALJ relied on 2010 evaluation and Reed’s work history to find higher functioning (borderline) and questioned 2007 scores	Remanded — record inadequate to resolve validity of 2007 scores; ALJ’s finding not supported by substantial evidence
Validity of 2007 WAIS-III scores	2007 examiner found no malingering and scores consistent with functioning	Commissioner points to 2010 examiner comments suggesting some inconsistency and possible malingering	Unclear whether 2010 report invalidated 2007 results; ALJ should further develop record/obtain clarification
Relevance of work history and daily activities	Reed’s limited daily activities and assistance needs are consistent with 2007 scores	Commissioner/ALJ used work history and activities to undermine disabling intellectual level	Court rejected relying solely on work or rudimentary activities to negate qualifying IQ scores; work history not dispositive
Manifestation before age 22 and additional impairments	Reed attended special education, repeated grades, quit school — supports onset before 22; anxiety, hand injury, obesity provide additional limitations	Commissioner did not contest these criteria	Court found evidence satisfied these two additional Listing 12.05C criteria

Maresh v. Barnhart, 438 F.3d 897 (8th Cir. 2006) (discussing Listing 12.05C requirements)
McDade v. Astrue, 720 F.3d 994 (8th Cir. 2013) (claimant bears burden to show all listing criteria)
Hulsey v. Astrue, 622 F.3d 917 (8th Cir. 2010) (defining borderline intellectual functioning IQ range)
Hill v. Colvin, 753 F.3d 798 (8th Cir. 2014) (standard of appellate review)
Ellis v. Barnhart, 392 F.3d 988 (8th Cir. 2005) (ALJ’s duty to develop record and re-contact physicians when necessary)
Lott v. Colvin, 772 F.3d 546 (8th Cir. 2014) (mild mental retardation may still permit some work; relevance to vocational assessment)
Bailey v. Apfel, 230 F.3d 1063 (8th Cir. 2000) (daily activities and family assistance do not necessarily undermine qualifying IQ results)