Kimberly Jeanquart v. Michael J. Astrue

Filing

PER CURIAM OPINION FILED - THE COURT: JAMES B. LOKEN, KERMIT E. BYE and STEVEN M. COLLOTON (UNPUBLISHED) [3848170] [11-2041]

United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________
No. 11-2041
___________
Kimberly Jeanquart,
On behalf of J.A.J.,
Appellant,
v.
Michael J. Astrue,
Social Security Commissioner,
Appellee.

*
*
*
* Appeal from the United States
* District Court for the Western
* District of Arkansas.
*
* [UNPUBLISHED]
*
*
*
___________

Submitted: October 12, 2011
Filed: November 10, 2011
___________
Before LOKEN, BYE, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.
___________
PER CURIAM.
Kimberly Jeanquart, on behalf of her minor child J.A.J., appeals the district
court’s1 order affirming the denial of supplemental security income. Upon de novo
review of the record, see Moore ex rel. Moore v. Barnhart, 413 F.3d 718, 721 (8th
Cir. 2005), we conclude (1) that it was proper for the administrative law judge (ALJ)

1

The Honorable Erin Setser, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western
District of Arkansas, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by consent
of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).

Appellate Case: 11-2041

Page: 1

Date Filed: 11/10/2011 Entry ID: 3848170

not to give controlling weight to the opinions of treating physician Kevin Jackson and
one-time consulting psychologist Vann Smith, see Medhaug v. Astrue, 578 F.3d 805,
815 (8th Cir. 2009) (because record must be evaluated as whole, treating physician’s
opinion does not automatically control); Charles v. Barnhart, 375 F.3d 777, 783 (8th
Cir. 2004) (generally when consulting physician examines claimant only once, his
opinion is not substantial evidence); and (2) that substantial evidence supports the
ALJ’s determination that J.A.J. had less-than-marked limitations in the functional
domains of attending and completing tasks and health and physical well-being, see
20 C.F.R. § 416.926a (functional equivalence for children). The district court is
affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
______________________________

-2-

Appellate Case: 11-2041

Page: 2

Date Filed: 11/10/2011 Entry ID: 3848170