Debbie Stage v. Carolyn Colvin
Filing
Filed opinion of the court by Judge Hamilton. We VACATE the judgment of the district court and REMAND the case to the agency for further proceedings consistent with the opinion. On remand, the ALJ should obtain medical testimony on the impact of Stage's need for a hip replacement on her ability to stand for hours at a time, and should give reasoned assessments of her credibility, her residual functional capacity, and the proper weight to accord her treating physician's opinion. Joel M. Flaum, Circuit Judge; Frank H. Easterbrook, Circuit Judge and David F. Hamilton, Circuit Judge. [6727176-1] [6727176] [15-1837]
Case: 15-1837
Document: 21
Filed: 02/09/2016
Pages: 11
In the
United States Court of Appeals
For the Seventh Circuit
____________________
No. 15‐1837
DEBBIE A. STAGE,
Plaintiff‐Appellant,
v.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN,
Acting Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant‐Appellee.
____________________
Appeal from the United States District Court for the
Northern District of Indiana, Hammond Division.
No. 2:13–CV–414–JVB — Joseph S. Van Bokkelen, Judge.
____________________
ARGUED NOVEMBER 17, 2015 — DECIDED FEBRUARY 9, 2016
____________________
Before FLAUM, EASTERBROOK, and HAMILTON, Circuit
Judges.
HAMILTON, Circuit Judge. Debbie Stage appeals the district
court’s judgment upholding the denial of her application for
supplemental security income, disability insurance benefits,
and disabled widow’s benefits. Stage was 56 years old at the
time of the decision. She suffers from chronic back and hip
problems exacerbated by obesity, caused in turn by hypothy‐
Case: 15-1837
2
Document: 21
Filed: 02/09/2016
Pages: 11
No. 15‐1837
roidism. She argues that the administrative law judge erred
by discounting significant new evidence she submitted after
an agency doctor had reviewed her medical records, by giv‐
ing little weight to her treating physician’s opinion, by dis‐
crediting her testimony about her pain without adequate
support, and by overstating her residual functional capacity.
We agree with Stage that the ALJ’s evaluation of her medical
evidence was unreasonable and that substantial evidence
does not support his finding that she remained capable of
performing light work. We reverse the district court’s judg‐
ment and remand this case to the agency for further consid‐
eration.
Stage’s back problems began when she slipped two discs
while working in a factory in 1985. She continued working,
though, and her pain became more severe over the years. By
2007, she had been diagnosed with arthritis in her back, hips,
left leg, and shoulders, as well as spinal degeneration, a tear
in a disc joint, and mild degenerative disc disease. Stage is
5’6” tall and at the time of the ALJ’s decision weighed over
200 pounds, giving her a body mass index of about 33, indi‐
cating obesity. Stage also suffered from a host of other health
problems, including hyperlipidemia, hypertension, and hy‐
pothyroidism—a condition that has made her obesity espe‐
cially difficult to control.
Stage applied for benefits claiming that debilitating back
and hip pain rendered her unable to work after October
2009. Her last job was general kitchen work at a residential‐
care facility. Before that she had worked as a cook, bartend‐
er, and factory laborer. Stage’s extensive medical records
show that she began seeking frequent treatment for worsen‐
ing hip and back pain late in 2010. X‐rays taken by a family
Case: 15-1837
No. 15‐1837
Document: 21
Filed: 02/09/2016
Pages: 11
3
practitioner revealed reduced blood flow to her legs and feet
due to calcification, as well as spinal disc narrowing and
joint narrowing. The doctor noted that Stage walked with an
antalgic gait (compensating for pain while walking) and ex‐
perienced muscle spasms. She was referred to a pain‐
management clinic. An anesthesiologist specializing in spi‐
nal pain took an MRI and diagnosed a lumbar disc bulge,
annular tear, and degenerative disc disease. The doctor rec‐
ommended an epidural steroid injection for pain relief. Stage
declined the injection because she had experienced no relief
from an earlier one.
During monthly visits in 2011 to her primary care physi‐
cian, Dr. Fernando Rivera, Stage consistently complained of
debilitating pain. She was prescribed numerous pain medi‐
cations, including Percocet, Vicodin, Norco, Tylenol–
Codeine #3, Flexeril, Mobic, tramadol, Ultram, and Valium.
She was also prescribed a back brace and a shower chair be‐
cause she was unable to stand while bathing.
In March 2011, a consulting physician for the agency ex‐
amined Stage. He noted that she arrived wearing a pre‐
scribed back brace and that she complained she could not
stand or walk for any length of time due to constant pain. He
observed that she walked with a hunch, had a restricted
range of motion in her lumbar region, could not stoop or
squat, had difficulty walking heel‐to‐toe, and had difficulty
both rising from a sitting position and getting off the exami‐
nation table. Her straight‐leg test was positive, indicating
radiating back pain.
That same month, a non‐examining physician for the
agency reviewed Stage’s medical records and completed a
Physical Residual Functional Capacity Assessment. This
Case: 15-1837
4
Document: 21
Filed: 02/09/2016
Pages: 11
No. 15‐1837
doctor concluded that Stage could occasionally lift or carry
20 pounds, frequently carry 10 pounds, and sit, stand, or
walk for six hours in an eight‐hour work day. He found
Stage’s claims of pain only partially credible.
Seven months later, after an acute flare‐up of pain led to
an emergency room visit and prescriptions for oxycodone
and Valium, Stage visited Dr. Richard Oni, a board‐certified
orthopedic surgeon. She complained that the worsening
pain prevented her from doing normal daily activities. Dr.
Oni spent 80 minutes examining Stage. He reported a severe
restriction of the range of motion of her hip, a strongly posi‐
tive “Patrick’s sign” (a test for pain in the hip), moderately
severe degenerative arthritis, degenerative disc disease, a
shortening of her left leg due to her antalgic gait, and the
other spinal problems already diagnosed by Dr. Rivera. Dr.
Oni ordered new MRIs that revealed degenerative changes
in her spine.
Dr. Oni wrote Dr. Rivera that Stage needed a total left hip
replacement “because of disabling symptoms.” He also pre‐
scribed additional pain medication. In April 2012, Dr. Rivera
completed a Physical Residual Functional Capacity Ques‐
tionnaire for Stage’s application for benefits. He included the
diagnoses from Dr. Oni listed above. He also described
Stage’s pain as severe, constant, and radiating down her
legs, and he opined that she was not capable of working
even low‐stress jobs because of her pain and its effects on
her concentration. He doubted that Stage could walk a single
city block without resting, and he added that she could sit or
stand continuously for only five minutes at a time, after
which she should lie down while elevating her legs on two
pillows. He also said that she could sit, stand, or walk for
Case: 15-1837
No. 15‐1837
Document: 21
Filed: 02/09/2016
Pages: 11
5
less than two hours in a workday, that she should walk with
a cane, and that she should never lift or carry anything.
The following month Stage testified at a hearing before
the ALJ that her pain made it difficult to carry even her five‐
pound purse, that she could walk on average only 30 to 40
feet before needing to take a break, and that she could stand
for at most five minutes at a time. She said that her two
teenage grandchildren and her sister did all housework and
chores other than washing the dishes, which she did while
sitting, taking hours to complete. Stage said that she also had
to sit while showering and riding a motorized cart for gro‐
cery shopping, relying on her grandchildren to fetch items
from the shelves. She described her arthritic pain as constant
and said it prevented her from engaging in almost all the ac‐
tivities that she formerly enjoyed.
At the hearing a vocational expert testified about the jobs
available to a hypothetical person of Stage’s age, education,
work experience, and physical capabilities. According to the
expert, if such a person remained capable of light work, she
could perform Stage’s past jobs as a bartender, cook, or wait‐
ress (but not as she performed them in the past), and could
perform light, unskilled jobs such as a production assembler,
small‐parts assembler, or electronics worker. (Light work, as
defined by the agency, requires the ability to stand or walk
for six hours a day, to lift or carry up to 20 pounds, to stoop
and crouch, and occasionally to climb ramps or stairs.)
However, a person of Stage’s age, education, and work ex‐
perience limited to sedentary work (standing or walking for
only two hours a day) would be deemed disabled under the
agency’s so‐called Grids. See 20 C.F.R. Pt. 404, Subpt. P,
App. 2.
Case: 15-1837
6
Document: 21
Filed: 02/09/2016
Pages: 11
No. 15‐1837
In his decision denying Stage’s claim for benefits, the ALJ
applied the standard five‐step analysis for determining
whether a person is disabled within the meaning of the So‐
cial Security Act. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4),
416.920(a)(4). He determined at step one that Stage had not
engaged in substantial gainful activity since the alleged on‐
set date. At step two, her combination of impairments—
lumbar spine degenerative disc disease, obesity, and osteoar‐
thritis in the left hip—constituted severe impairments,
meaning that they significantly limited her ability to work.
At step three the ALJ found that these impairments did not
meet or equal any listed criteria for an automatic finding of
disability. At step four the ALJ determined Stage’s residual
functional capacity, meaning ability to work despite her
health problems. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(1),
416.945(a)(1). The ALJ found that Stage was still capable of
performing light work, which would require her to stand
and walk for six hours in an eight‐hour work day. Based on
this residual functional capacity and Stage’s age and educa‐
tion, the ALJ concluded at step five that she could work as a
production assembler, small‐parts assembler, or electronics
worker and therefore was not disabled.
The ALJ gave “little weight” to Dr. Rivera’s opinion,
whose report he found “internally inconsistent and not sup‐
ported by his own treatment notes or the overall record.”
The ALJ further found Stage’s testimony “not credible to the
extent [that her symptoms] are inconsistent” with this resid‐
ual functional capacity because, he wrote, no medical evi‐
dence proved that her condition had worsened since 2007,
and she did not begin seeking pain treatment until a year
after her alleged onset date. The ALJ wrote that Stage’s
choice to forgo “epidural injections as well as sur‐
Case: 15-1837
No. 15‐1837
Document: 21
Filed: 02/09/2016
Pages: 11
7
gery … suggests the claimant’s symptoms may not be as se‐
vere as alleged.” The Appeals Council denied review, and
the district court upheld the denial of benefits.
Stage’s strongest argument on appeal is that Dr. Oni’s
report, which diagnosed significant hip deformity, a restrict‐
ed range of motion, and the need for a total left hip replace‐
ment, changed the picture so much that the ALJ erred by
continuing to rely on an outdated assessment by a non‐
examining physician and by evaluating himself the signifi‐
cance of Dr. Oni’s report. We agree. See Goins v. Colvin, 764
F.3d 677, 680 (7th Cir. 2014) (remanding where ALJ uncriti‐
cally accepted vague non‐examining physician’s report and
failed to submit new MRI to medical scrutiny, which “she
should have done since it was new and potentially decisive
medical evidence”).
Dr. Oni’s evaluation contained significant, new, and po‐
tentially decisive findings—the need for a hip replacement
and evidence of further spinal degeneration. They could rea‐
sonably change the reviewing physician’s opinion. Instead
of consulting a physician, though, the ALJ evaluated the
MRIs and recommendation himself. He decided that they
were “similar” to existing evidence. “ALJs are required to
rely on expert opinions instead of determining the signifi‐
cance of particular medical findings themselves.” See Moon
v. Colvin, 763 F.3d 718, 722 (7th Cir. 2014). The ALJ here was
not qualified or authorized to determine that Stage’s need
for a hip replacement would not have affected her supposed
ability to stand and walk for six hours a day, upon which the
ALJ’s denial of benefits depended.
The ALJ erred similarly by disregarding Stage’s need for
hip replacement because she had not actually undergone
Case: 15-1837
8
Document: 21
Filed: 02/09/2016
Pages: 11
No. 15‐1837
surgery without exploring why she had not. Recall that she
was, after all, applying for supplemental security income.
See Beardsley v. Colvin, 758 F.3d 834, 840 (7th Cir. 2014) (ALJ
erred by drawing negative inference from SSI claimant’s de‐
cision not to undergo surgery without inquiring into factors
such as ability to pay). Stage’s medical file also indicated
that she needed to delay surgery until she could arrange for
her grandchildren’s care. The ALJ used that point to dis‐
count her credibility. He inferred that this must mean Stage
was capable of greater household activities than she admit‐
ted. This analysis is flawed. Stage’s need to ensure that two
teenagers would be supervised before scheduling major sur‐
gery shows nothing about the legitimacy of her claim of pain
that was disabling and called for a hip replacement.
We also agree with Stage that the ALJ’s assessment of re‐
sidual functional capacity lacks adequate support in the rec‐
ord. When determining residual functional capacity, the ALJ
“must evaluate all limitations that arise from medically de‐
terminable impairments, even those that are not severe, and
may not dismiss a line of evidence contrary to the ruling.”
Villano v. Astrue, 556 F.3d 558, 563 (7th Cir. 2009). Here, the
ALJ’s analysis of Stage’s medical evidence does not logically
support his finding that she could perform light work. He
did not engage sufficiently with the evidence showing she
could not do so. That evidence included: Dr. Rivera’s opin‐
ion that Stage could not walk a single block and could sit or
stand for only five minutes at a time; his opinion that Stage
required total hip replacement; the pain specialist’s recom‐
mendation of epidural injections; the exacerbating effect of
Stage’s obesity; and the strong narcotics she was taking to
treat her pain. See, e.g., Carradine v. Barnhart, 360 F.3d 751,
Case: 15-1837
Document: 21
No. 15‐1837
Filed: 02/09/2016
Pages: 11
9
755 (7th Cir. 2004) (physicians’ prescription of strong pain
medications substantiated claimant’s pain allegations).
The ALJ also rejected Stage’s testimony about her inabil‐
ity to walk or stand and her severely limited daily activities.
He gave the opinion of her treating physician “little weight”
because of purported inconsistencies between his question‐
naire answers and the objective evidence (splitting hairs un‐
fairly, in our opinion) without substantiating his decision to
do so.1
A treating physician’s opinion is entitled to controlling
weight, however, if it is well‐supported and not inconsistent
with other substantial evidence. An ALJ who does not credit
such an opinion must offer good reasons for doing so and
must address the appropriate weight to give the opinion.
See, e.g., Larson v. Astrue, 615 F.3d 744, 749 (7th Cir. 2010);
Moss v. Astrue, 555 F.3d 556, 561 (7th Cir. 2009). No such
analysis was conducted here. It strains credulity to find that
a claimant who needed a hip replacement and had to sit
while showering and shopping for groceries was capable of
standing for six hours a day in a workplace.
Before basing a denial on such a finding, the ALJ should
have considered contrary evidence and obtained a medical
opinion based on a complete record. Barrett v. Barnhart, 355
1 The “inconsistencies” identified by the ALJ are so minor as to be
immaterial: Dr. Rivera’s treating notes failed to tell Stage to elevate her
legs, but the RFC questionnaire said she must do so; the treatment notes
did not reflect a prescription for a cane, but the questionnaire said she
should use one; Stage testified she could walk no more than 30 to 40 feet
without a break, yet Dr. Rivera said she could walk zero blocks; and Dr.
Rivera had recommended that she exercise yet said she could sit or stand
for only five minutes at a time.
Case: 15-1837
10
Document: 21
Filed: 02/09/2016
Pages: 11
No. 15‐1837
F.3d 1065, 1068 (7th Cir. 2004) (“A great many people who
are not grossly obese and do not have arthritic knees find it
distinctly uncomfortable to stand for two hours at a time. To
suppose that [claimant] could do so day after day on a facto‐
ry floor borders on the fantastic, but in any event has no evi‐
dentiary basis that we can find.”).
Finally, we agree with Stage that the ALJ failed to evalu‐
ate her claims of pain properly and relied on improper
grounds in making his adverse credibility determination. In
addition to the problems already noted, the ALJ also erred
by basing his adverse credibility determination on two
grounds that we have repeatedly held improper: (1) Stage’s
decision not to undergo invasive and expensive surgery,
without inquiring into her reasons for doing so, and (2) her
ability to care for herself and her grandchildren. See Bjornson
v. Astrue, 671 F.3d 640, 647 (7th Cir. 2012) (stating that failure
to recognize differences between activities in daily living
and a full‐time job “is a recurrent, and deplorable, feature”
of ALJs’ opinions”); Gentle v. Barnhart, 430 F.3d 865, 867 (7th
Cir. 2005) (remanding where ALJ found claimant’s spinal
disk disease‐related pain allegations not credible based on
her ability to care for self and children); Beardsley, 758 F.3d at
838 (finding that claimant’s limited ability to care for her
mother “lend[s] no support to the conclusion that she would
be able to spend six hours a day, every day, on her feet
working,” and rejecting adverse inference drawn from
claimant’s decision not to undergo surgery, absent explora‐
tion of the reason). In doing so, the ALJ overlooked testimo‐
ny that Stage performed only very limited tasks—with great
difficulty—and that her teenage grandchildren and her sister
helped her with most tasks of daily living, so that her ability
to cope with those tasks at home offered little support for
Case: 15-1837
No. 15‐1837
Document: 21
Filed: 02/09/2016
Pages: 11
11
her ability to handle competitive full‐time work at a “light”
level of exertion.
Accordingly, we VACATE the judgment of the district
court and REMAND the case to the agency for further pro‐
ceedings consistent with this opinion. On remand, the ALJ
should obtain medical testimony on the impact of Stage’s
need for a hip replacement on her ability to stand for hours
at a time, and should give reasoned assessments of her cred‐
ibility, her residual functional capacity, and the proper
weight to accord her treating physician’s opinion.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?