Knott v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner

Filing 10

MEMORANDUM OPINION and ORDER OF REMAND; the decision of the Commissioner is reversed and this action is remanded to the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration. Signed by Judge C Lynwood Smith, Jr on 10/20/14. (SPT )

FILED
2014 Oct-20 PM 02:06
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
N.D. OF ALABAMA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
WESTERN DIVISION
TOBY KNOTT,
Claimant,
vs.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting
Commissioner, Social Security
Administration,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 7:14-cv-00193-CLS

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER OF REMAND
Claimant, Toby Knott, commenced this action on February 3, 2014, pursuant
to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), seeking judicial review of a final adverse decision of the
Commissioner, affirming the decision of the Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”), and
thereby denying his claim for a period of disability and disability insurance benefits.
For the reasons stated herein, the court finds that the Commissioner’s ruling is due
to be reversed, and the case remanded to the Commissioner for further proceedings.
The court’s role in reviewing claims brought under the Social Security Act is
a narrow one. The scope of review is limited to determining whether there is
substantial evidence in the record as a whole to support the findings of the
Commissioner, and whether correct legal standards were applied. See Lamb v.
Bowen, 847 F.2d 698, 701 (11th Cir. 1988); Tieniber v. Heckler, 720 F.2d 1251, 1253

(11th Cir. 1983).
Claimant contends that the Commissioner’s decision is neither supported by
substantial evidence nor in accordance with applicable legal standards. Specifically,
claimant asserts that the ALJ: (1) failed to consider the testimony of Gary Wharton,
a lay witness; (2) failed to consider the testimony of his independent vocational
expert, John McKinney; (3) failed to include all of his impairments in the
hypothetical question posed to the Commissioner’s vocational expert during the
administrative hearing; (4) improperly considered the opinion of his treating
physician; and (5) made a credibility finding that was not supported by substantial
evidence. He also asserts that the Appeals Council improperly considered new
evidence submitted for the first time on appeal. Upon review of the record, the court
concludes that claimant’s fifth contention has merit.
Claimant asserts, among other things, that the ALJ incorrectly considered
inconsistencies in his reports of daily activities when evaluating his credibility. The
ALJ found that
claimant has been inconsistent regarding daily living activities. He
testified he was unable to perform household chores and had to lie down
the most of the day.[sic] However, in his Function Reports, the claimant
described activities of daily living which are not limited to the extent
one would expect, given his complaints of debilitating back impairment,
pain, medication side effects, and physical limitations. He reported he
was able to maintain personal care and hygiene, prepare simple meals,
perform household chores, shop, handle financial matters and follow
2

instructions . . . .1
It is generally appropriate for an ALJ to consider a claimant’s reported daily
activities when evaluating the claimant’s credibility. See 20 C.F.R. §
404.1529(c)(3)(i) (listing “daily activities” first among the factors the Social Security
Administration will consider in evaluating a claimant’s subjective complaints of
pain). Even so, claimant asserts that the ALJ overstated the level of activities he
included in his Function Report, and that the Function Report, when considered
fairly, actually is not inconsistent with his hearing testimony. In the Function Report,
claimant described his daily activities as follows:
When I wake up in the morning, it is hard for me to get up. I have
to stay in bed for approximately 2 hrs before I can get up due to pain and
severe spasm in my back. Then I shower to get relief, eat and take my
medicine. Watch TV sometime. Read or call a family or friend. Move
around & about in the house. Repeat the same routine until it’s time for
bed.2
He indicated that he did not take care of any other people or animals in his home. He
did not report any problems caring for his hair, shaving, or feeding himself, but it
takes him longer to get dressed than it used to because he experiences pain when he
bends over to put on shoes or pants. He also has to use a shower chair and toilet chair
with a rail because bending and squatting cause him pain. Sometimes he is in so

1

Tr. 18 (alteration and redaction supplied).

2

Tr. 193.
3

much pain, or experiences such depression due to his condition, that he forgets to do
things like grocery shop, prepare meals, and even eat. He does not, however, need
any reminders or assistance in taking his medication. Claimant can prepare simple
meals, like sandwiches or frozen dinners. He can do household chores like washing
dishes and tidying up twice a week, but it takes him most of the day. He cannot do
any outside chores, and he needs help with more involved household chores like
vacuuming, dusting, laundry, and preparing complex meals. He leaves the house
once or twice a week, and he can travel and drive alone. He can shop for food and
personal items once a week for about one and a half hours, and he can manage his
own finances. He reads and watches television every day, but he can no longer do
other activities he used to enjoy, like fishing and bowling. He talks on the phone
daily, but he rarely goes out for social reasons. Claimant indicated that he can only
lift ten to twenty pounds, and he can walk for only five to ten minutes before having
to rest for another five to ten minutes. He cannot squat, kneel, bend, stand, reach, or
sit for more than thirty minutes at a time. He cannot climb stairs, concentrate for
more than thirty minutes to an hour, or complete many tasks. He follows instructions
and gets along well with authority figures, but he is not good at handling stress. He
has an unusual fear of falling due to pain in his back and leg.3
During the administrative hearing, claimant testified that he can drive. He can
3

Tr. 194-99.
4

cook, but he usually makes sandwiches because it is quicker. He can sometimes wash
dishes, but other times he allows them to pile up for days if he is in pain. He cannot
vacuum or iron. He can take clothes in and out of the washer and dryer, but he cannot
change the sheets on his bed. He can sweep his kitchen floor because it is not a big
room, but he does not mop. He occasionally cuts his grass a little at a time over a
several-day period, but usually a friend does it for him. He does not do any gardening
or car care. He reads periodically and watches a lot of television, but sometimes a
sudden pain will prevent him from concentrating on an entire book or television
program. He does not go to church, restaurants, or sporting events, and he does not
participate in any other social activities. He uses a cane, but his doctor told him it
was not necessary. In fact, the doctor told claimant that he should go without using
the cane as much as possible, but claimant likes to use the cane anyway because he
feels off balance.4 Claimant testified that he can only sit for five to ten minutes
without experiencing pain, and he can sit for fifteen to thirty minutes at a time if he
is allowed to move around in the chair for comfort. He can stand and walk for ten to
fifteen minutes before needing to sit down. He cannot lift anything over twenty
pounds, but he tries not to lift anything over ten pounds. He has problems bending,
kneeling, crouching, and crawling due to pain, but he does not have any problems

4

Tr. 43-47.
5

using his hands.5 He has to lie down ten times or more during the day, for anywhere
from fifteen to forty-five minutes at a time, to relieve his pain.6
This court agrees with claimant that there are not many inconsistencies between
his Function Report and his hearing testimony. Accordingly, the ALJ’s finding that
claimant’s inconsistent reports of his daily living activities negatively affected
claimant’s credibility was not supported by substantial evidence.

Remand is

warranted for further consideration of claimant’s daily activities, and particularly
whether claimant’s testimony regarding pain and other limitations should be
considered credible, in the absence of inconsistencies regarding claimant’s reported
daily activities.
In accordance with the foregoing, the decision of the Commissioner is reversed,
and this action is REMANDED to the Commissioner of the Social Security
Administration for further proceedings consistent with this memorandum opinion and
order.
The Clerk is directed to close this file.
DONE this 20th day of October, 2014.

______________________________
United States District Judge
5

Tr. 50-52.

6

Tr. 53, 56.
6