TORMEY v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, 3:15-cv-08208

Background

Plaintiff Joli Tormey (b. 1967) applied for Title II disability benefits for onset September 15, 2010, alleging cervical radiculopathy, optic neuritis, cardiomyopathy (post-ICD), anxiety, and depression; prior work as a tennis instructor.
Administrative record contains pre-2012 treatment for cervical disc disease and optic nerve injury, but ALJ primarily relied on medical records from 2012–2013 covering exams, imaging, ICD implantation, and intermittent conservative treatment.
Key objective findings in the relevant period: reduced cervical range of motion, intermittent left upper-extremity sensory changes, advanced C5–C6 degenerative disc disease on X-ray, 20/30 vision without gross optic atrophy on ophthalmic exam, and successful ICD placement with temporary post-procedure driving/arm restrictions.
Several consultative and nonexamining SSA reviewers assessed a residual functional capacity (RFC) ranging to light work with postural and environmental limits; one treating physician later completed an RFC form finding no work limitations.
At an ALJ hearing, Plaintiff testified to daily pain, hand numbness/weakness affecting handling/fingering, visual blurring (especially at night/bright lights), anxiety/panic, and limitations in sitting/standing; vocational expert (VE) identified sedentary unskilled jobs (address clerk, document preparer, possibly charge account clerk) consistent with ALJ’s RFC.
ALJ denied benefits at step five, concluding Plaintiff can perform a limited range of sedentary work with frequent bilateral handling/fingering; Appeals Council denied review, and district court affirmed.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether ALJ improperly discounted Plaintiff’s subjective pain and hand/arm limitations	Tormey argued her testimony and medical history support a limitation to only occasional handling/fingering, which the VE said would preclude jobs	Commissioner argued objective, more recent medical evidence and inconsistent treatment (failure to pursue PT/surgery) support ALJ’s credibility assessment and RFC	Court held ALJ’s credibility and RFC findings are supported by substantial evidence and appropriately weighed objective records and treatment noncompliance
Whether the VE jobs identified exist in significant numbers and fit the RFC	Tormey challenged availability of addresser/address clerk, argued document preparer requires frequent near vision she lacks, and noted VE didn’t quantify charge account clerk	Commissioner relied on VE testimony, DOT consistency, and that ALJ only needed at least one job; ALJ discounted charge account clerk in decision	Court held VE testimony was acceptable, DOT consistency noted, document preparer and address clerk plausibly available, and ALJ relied on at least one suitable occupation; claim failed
Whether pre-onset medical records should control RFC	Tormey relied on earlier records (2006–2007) showing radiculopathy and reduced grip strength to establish severe manipulative limits	Commissioner and ALJ emphasized contemporaneous 2012–2013 records as governing and gave less weight to pre-onset evidence	Court upheld ALJ’s focus on relevant-period records and reasoning for discounting earlier records
Whether ALJ improperly failed to give ‘‘great weight’’ to Plaintiff’s testimony because of corroborating evidence	Tormey asserted her testimony was corroborated by medical findings and thus entitled to great weight	Commissioner argued corroboration was insufficient: objective findings were limited and several treating recommendations (PT, surgery) were not followed; ALJ applied the two-step symptom evaluation and cited inconsistencies	Court held ALJ applied the proper legal framework (20 C.F.R. § 404.1529) and substantial evidence supports the credibility determination

Key Cases Cited

Sykes v. Apfel, 228 F.3d 259 (3d Cir. 2000) (five-step disability evaluation and individualized determination requirement)
Burnett v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 220 F.3d 112 (3d Cir. 2000) (claimant burden to show impairment meets or equals a listing)
Plummer v. Apfel, 186 F.3d 422 (3d Cir. 1999) (requirements for ALJ’s opinion and consideration of evidence)
Hartranft v. Apfel, 181 F.3d 358 (3d Cir. 1999) (ALJ may discount subjective complaints when inconsistent with objective evidence and record)
Morales v. Apfel, 225 F.3d 310 (3d Cir. 2000) (substantial evidence standard and review scope)
Richardson v. Perales, 402 U.S. 389 (U.S. 1971) (administrative findings supported by substantial evidence)
Williams v. Sullivan, 970 F.2d 1178 (3d Cir. 1992) (deference owed to ALJ’s factual findings)
Diaz v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 577 F.3d 500 (3d Cir. 2009) (deference to ALJ’s credibility assessments and reconciliation of expert opinions)
Wright v. Sullivan, 900 F.2d 675 (3d Cir. 1990) (Commissioner need only identify one job existing in the national economy)