Summary
The United States District Court for the District of Colorado affirmed the Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of S.E.S.’s application for Disability Insurance Benefits. The court held that the administrative law judge’s residual functional capacity determination was supported by substantial evidence and that the ALJ was not required to order an additional consultative examination.
Holdings
- The ALJ did not have a duty to order an additional consultative examination because Plaintiff did not show that the need for one was clearly established in the record.
- The absence of a medical opinion specifically addressing RFC did not invalidate the ALJ's RFC determination because RFC is an administrative determination and may be assessed from the medical record and other evidence.
Questions Presented
- Whether the ALJ erred by failing to order an additional consultative examination or obtain a medical opinion specifically addressing Plaintiff's residual functional capacity.
- Whether substantial evidence supported the ALJ's residual functional capacity determination that Plaintiff could perform light work.
Disposition
affirmed
Cases Cited (15)
- Flaherty v. Astrue, 515 F.3d 1067, 1069-70 (10th Cir. 2008)(followed)
- Barnhart v. Walton, 535 U.S. 212, 214-15 (2002)(followed)
- Williams v. Bowen, 844 F.2d 748, 750-52 (10th Cir. 1988)(followed)
- Neilson v. Sullivan, 992 F.2d 1118, 1120 (10th Cir. 1993)(followed)
- Lax v. Astrue, 489 F.3d 1080, 1084 (10th Cir. 2007)(followed)
- Vallejo v. Berryhill, 849 F.3d 951, 954 (10th Cir. 2017)(followed)
- Musgrave v. Sullivan, 966 F.2d 1371, 1374 (10th Cir. 1992)(followed)
- Smith v. Colvin, 821 F.3d 1264, 1266 (10th Cir. 2016)(followed)
- Hawkins v. Chater, 113 F.3d 1162, 1164, 1167-68 (10th Cir. 1997)(followed)
- Jazvin v. Colvin, 659 F. App'x 487, 489 (10th Cir. 2016)(followed)
Showing top 10 of 15.
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…