Kiersten D. v. Commissioner of Social Security

Summary

The United States District Court for the Western District of New York reviewed the denial of Kiersten D.’s applications for Supplemental Security Income and Childhood Disability Benefits. The court granted Plaintiff’s motion for judgment on the pleadings and remanded the matter because the Administrative Law Judge provided no evidentiary explanation for assigning a specific nine-percent off-task limitation, contrary to the treating physician’s opinion that Plaintiff would be off task more than ten percent of the workday. The court also directed consideration on remand of Plaintiff’s arguments concerning absenteeism and the characterization of the evidence.

Holdings

1. The ALJ erred by substituting an unexplained nine-percent off-task limitation for the treating physician's opinion that Plaintiff would be off task more than ten percent of the workday. A highly specific residual functional capacity limitation must be supported by evidence in the record rather than the ALJ's own surmise.
2. The RFC error was not harmless because the vocational expert testified that a ten-percent off-task limitation would preclude competitive employment.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the ALJ's unexplained nine-percent off-task limitation in Plaintiff's residual functional capacity assessment was supported by substantial evidence.
2. Whether the unexplained off-task limitation was harmless when the vocational expert testified that a ten-percent limitation would preclude competitive employment.

Disposition

remanded