Wright v. Social Security Administration
3:13-cv-00897
M.D. Tenn.Aug 31, 2015Background
- Bruce Wright applied for Social Security Disability Insurance (DIB), alleging disability from March 1, 2009, due to cervical degenerative disc disease (post two fusions), left-hand tendon/shoulder problems, neuropathy, and related pain; ALJ hearing held December 22, 2011.
- ALJ found severe impairments but concluded they did not meet or equal a Listing and assigned an RFC for a restricted range of light work (limited standing/walking, sitting durations, no left-arm overhead reaching, occasional other reaching and postural limits).
- The ALJ gave “significant weight” to consultative examiner Dr. Deborah Morton’s opinion and incorporated many (but not every) of her limitations into the RFC; the ALJ also discounted claimant’s testimony as only partially credible.
- The ALJ considered but gave little weight to the VA partial-disability ratings (insomnia and sleep apnea), noting they did not opine on claimant’s physical work capacity; Appeals Council denied review; magistrate judge recommended affirmance.
- Plaintiff challenged (1) the ALJ’s treatment of Dr. Morton’s opinion, (2) consideration of the VA rating under HALLEX, (3) alleged inconsistencies between the VE/DOT and the RFC, and (4) that the RFC should have been sedentary, making him disabled under the grids.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Weight given to consultative examiner (Dr. Morton) / incorporation of her limitations | ALJ improperly relied on Dr. Morton though she did not review a September 2009 MRI and failed to include all of Dr. Morton’s opined limitations in the RFC | Dr. Morton mainly examined the claimant; ALJ considered the MRI and the record; ALJ may accept parts of an opinion and need not adopt it wholesale | ALJ’s treatment of Dr. Morton was reasonable; she considered the record including the MRI, gave Morton significant weight, and permissibly included only limitations she found supported by evidence |
| VA disability rating consideration (HALLEX II‑1‑11‑12) | ALJ mischaracterized VA findings and failed to account for VA opinion that physician found reduced reliability/productivity from insomnia/sleep apnea | VA ratings are nonbinding, based on different standards; ALJ acknowledged VA rating and reasonably gave it little weight because it did not address physical work capacity | Omission of updated VA percentage was harmless; ALJ properly considered VA rating and permissibly afforded it little weight under SSA rules |
| Alleged DOT/VE conflicts and upper-extremity limitations | Jobs identified by VE require frequent reaching/handling/fingering, inconsistent with RFC and medical evidence supporting more upper-extremity limits | VE testified there was no meaningful conflict with the DOT and explained job data; consultative exam showed claimant could continuously handle/finger/feel | No unresolved conflict: VE explained the occupations and numbers; additional upper-extremity limits were not supported, so VE testimony constituted substantial evidence |
| RFC level — should be sedentary rather than light | Record (degenerative cervical disease, radiculopathy, pain, MRI showing canal stenosis) supports more restrictive RFC to sedentary and disability under the grids | ALJ’s RFC accounts for limitations (reduced standing/walking, left reach limits); reduced standing alone does not necessitate sedentary RFC if lifting/carrying abilities remain consistent with light work | ALJ’s RFC was supported by substantial evidence; claimant’s testimony was discounted in part and additional restrictions were not warranted; light RFC stands |
Key Cases Cited
- Her v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 203 F.3d 388 (6th Cir.) (defining substantial evidence standard)
- Moon v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1175 (6th Cir. 1990) (ALJ may discount subjective complaints when inconsistent with objective evidence)
- Varley v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 820 F.2d 777 (6th Cir. 1987) (vocational expert testimony may rebut disability when hypothetical reflects claimant’s limitations)
- Walters v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 127 F.3d 525 (6th Cir. 1997) (ALJ credibility findings entitled to deference)
- Wilson v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 378 F.3d 541 (6th Cir. 2004) (ALJ must give reasons for weight assigned to medical opinions)
- Bell v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 105 F.3d 244 (6th Cir.) (substantial evidence is more than a scintilla but less than a preponderance)