VEAL v. BERRYHILL, 1:17-cv-00265

Plaintiff Demetris Veal applied for DIB and SSI alleging disability from November 29, 2012, due to back problems (post‑fusion L5‑S1), leg/hand weakness, insomnia, and depression; ALJ hearing held August 1, 2016.
Medical record: 2012 L5‑S1 fusion; mixed objective findings — some consultative/office exams showing gait disturbance, decreased left leg strength and sensory loss, but serial imaging showed appropriate fusion and no canal/foraminal compromise.
Exam/treatment history shows gaps (Sept 2013–July 2016), mostly conservative treatment, limited pain management follow‑through, and no hospitalizations for pain.
ALJ found severe impairment: spine disorder; nonsevere mental impairments; RFC: sedentary work, sit 7 hours/day (1 hour at a time), stand/walk 2 hours/day (15 minutes at a time), use a cane, no bending/stooping/crawling/kneeling, occasional stairs/overhead reach, no hazards or driving.
VE testified no past work viable under RFC but three representative sedentary jobs existed in national economy; ALJ relied on VE and state and consultative opinions and denied benefits.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the 19‑minute hearing violated due process	Hearing was too short to develop record; violated meaningful opportunity to be heard	ALJ sufficiently developed record; plaintiff represented; no evidence of prejudice	No due‑process violation; short hearing alone not prejudicial where record adequate
Whether ALJ failed to develop testimony about continuous sit/stand/walk limits	ALJ should have elicited more detailed limits (e.g., whether plaintiff could do 1–2 hour increments)	ALJ asked about limits; RFC (15‑minute/1‑hour increments) matches testimony and medical record; no gap in evidence	No remand; ALJ’s questioning and record supported RFC and no further development required

Bloodsworth v. Heckler, 703 F.2d 1233 (11th Cir. 1983) (defines substantial evidence standard)
Wilson v. Barnhart, 284 F.3d 1219 (11th Cir. 2002) (Commissioner’s factual findings conclusive if supported by substantial evidence)
Moore v. Barnhart, 405 F.3d 1208 (11th Cir. 2005) (substantial‑evidence review principles)
Brown v. Shalala, 44 F.3d 931 (11th Cir. 1995) (ALJ’s duty to develop full and fair record, heightened when unrepresented)
McDaniel v. Bowen, 800 F.2d 1026 (11th Cir. 1986) (step‑two threshold for severe impairment)
Phillips v. Barnhart, 357 F.3d 1232 (11th Cir. 2004) (burden shifts to Commissioner at step five to show work exists in economy)
Barnhart v. Walton, 535 U.S. 212 (U.S. Supreme Court 2002) (disability duration requirement)
Cowart v. Schweiker, 662 F.2d 731 (11th Cir. 1981) (court must analyze all evidence and explain weight given to probative exhibits)