Summary
The United States District Court for the District of New Jersey reviewed the denial of Anthony D.’s application for Social Security Disability benefits. The court held that the ALJ inadequately evaluated the severity of his neurological and headache impairments at step two, failed to adequately explain the rejection of a state agency physician’s opinion, and improperly discounted his subjective complaints without considering financial barriers to treatment. The court vacated the ALJ’s decision and remanded for further administrative proceedings.
Holdings
- The ALJ's finding that Plaintiff had no severe impairment was not supported by an adequate evaluation of the record and required remand.
- The ALJ was required to explain whether she considered medical evidence generated shortly after the date last insured when determining the severity of Plaintiff's impairments.
- The ALJ erred by rejecting the state-agency physician's opinion without explaining how it was unsupported by or inconsistent with the record.
- The ALJ erred by discounting Plaintiff's subjective complaints based substantially on sparse treatment without first considering his explanation that financial hardship and lack of insurance limited his access to care.
- The ALJ failed to evaluate the combined effect of Plaintiff's impairments on his ability to perform basic work activities.
Questions Presented
- Whether the ALJ erred by finding at step two that Plaintiff had no severe impairment or combination of impairments.
- Whether the ALJ adequately considered medical evidence generated shortly after the date last insured.
- Whether the ALJ adequately explained the rejection of the state-agency physician's opinion.
- Whether the ALJ properly considered Plaintiff's financial inability to obtain more extensive treatment before discounting his subjective complaints.
- Whether the ALJ properly evaluated the combined effect of Plaintiff's impairments on his ability to perform basic work activities.
Disposition
vacated
Cases Cited (26)
- Hess v. Commissioner of Social Security, 931 F.3d 198, 201-02, 208 n.10 (3d Cir. 2019)(followed)
- Chandler v. Commissioner of Social Security, 667 F.3d 356, 359 (3d Cir. 2011)(followed)
- Sykes v. Apfel, 228 F.3d 259, 262 (3d Cir. 2000)(followed)
- Biestek v. Berryhill, 587 U.S. 97, 103 (2019)(followed)
- Consolidated Edison Co. of New York v. NLRB, 305 U.S. 197, 229 (1938)(followed)
- Hunter Douglas, Inc. v. NLRB, 804 F.2d 808, 812 (3d Cir. 1986)(followed)
- Rutherford v. Barnhart, 399 F.3d 546, 552 (3d Cir. 2005)(followed)
- Kent v. Schweiker, 710 F.2d 110, 114 (3d Cir. 1983)(followed)
- K.K. ex rel. K.S. v. Commissioner of Social Security, 2018 WL 1509091, at *4 (D.N.J. Mar. 27, 2018)(followed)
- Matthews v. Apfel, 239 F.3d 589, 592 (3d Cir. 2001)(followed)
Showing top 10 of 26.
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.