Wright v. Colvin
4:13-cv-00042
E.D. Va.Mar 18, 2014Background
- Anthony Wright (b. 1963), a former Marine and VA employee, applied for Social Security disability insurance benefits alleging disability beginning October 1, 2005; ALJ found he stopped SGA on March 1, 2010 and denied benefits.
- Medical record documents chronic lumbar degenerative disc disease with radiculopathy, severe bilateral knee arthritis, and mental-health issues (depression, PTSD, past substance abuse); VA granted Individual Unemployability (80% rating) effective June 16, 2010.
- The VA Rating Decision attachment (detailed rationale) was not in the administrative record before the ALJ, though extensive VA treatment records were included.
- ALJ gave the VA disability rating "little weight," finding it lacked substantive medical explanation and that VA standards differ from SSA standards; ALJ adopted a restrictive RFC (light work with sit/stand option, postural limits, no lower-extremity pushing/pulling, simple routine tasks, limited social contact) and identified alternative jobs.
- After the ALJ decision, the Fourth Circuit decided Bird v. Commissioner, requiring the SSA to give VA disability ratings "substantial weight" unless the record clearly justifies deviation; Wright appealed solely on the ground the ALJ failed to apply Bird.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the ALJ properly weighed the VA disability rating | Wright: ALJ should have afforded the VA rating "substantial weight" per Bird or explained why to deviate | Commissioner: ALJ reasonably gave little weight because VA standards differ, the rating lacked substantive medical explanation, and VA examiners’ notes conflict with the rating; any error harmless | Remand: Court finds Bird changed the controlling standard; ALJ did not apply Bird and did not explain deviation from "substantial weight," so remand is required for reevaluation |
| Whether omission of the VA Rating Decision attachment required further development of the record | Wright: ALJ had a duty to develop the record and obtain missing VA rationale | Commissioner: ALJ considered VA treatment records and need not obtain the missing attachment | Court: ALJ had a duty to develop the record; absence of the Rating Decision and the pre-Bird analysis mean the ALJ did not assess the VA rating under the new standard, warranting remand |
| Whether any error was harmless (i.e., outcome would be same) | Wright: VA rating may affect the disability determination given the restrictive RFC and post-2010 deterioration | Commissioner: Any error was harmless because substantial evidence supports denial | Court: Cannot conclude harmlessness; the VA rating "may have a bearing" and could change the outcome under Bird, so remand required |
| Proper remedy for legal error | Wright: Vacate and remand for reconsideration under Bird standard | Commissioner: No remand necessary (or remand would be futile) | Court: Vacate and remand to allow ALJ to apply Bird, reweigh VA rating, and further develop record as needed |
Key Cases Cited
- Bird v. Commissioner, 699 F.3d 337 (4th Cir. 2012) (SSA must give substantial weight to VA disability ratings unless record clearly justifies deviation)
- Sims v. Apfel, 530 U.S. 103 (2000) (ALJ has duty to develop the record in inquisitorial SSA proceedings)
- Nken v. Holder, 585 F.3d 818 (4th Cir. 2009) (courts must restrict themselves to what an agency actually said)
- Richardson v. Perales, 402 U.S. 389 (1971) (definition of substantial evidence standard)
- Craig v. Chater, 76 F.3d 585 (4th Cir. 1996) (court will not re-weigh evidence or make credibility determinations on review)