Scott v. Social Security Administration
Filing
18
ORDER dismissing the Complaint with prejudice. Signed by Magistrate Judge Beth Deere on 3/30/2015. (jak)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
JONESBORO DIVISION
SHAMEKA SCOTT
V.
PLAINTIFF
NO. 3:14CV91-BD
CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner,
Social Security Administration
DEFENDANT
ORDER
Oral argument hearing was held on March 19, 2015. Following a review of the
record and arguments presented by counsel, the Court announced its findings of fact and
conclusions of law, affirming the Commissioner’s decision. Based on the record as a
whole, there was sufficient evidence to support the decision that Ms. Scott could perform
a reduced range of light work, in spite of her severe and non-severe impairments.1 An
excerpted transcript of the Court’s findings and conclusions is attached.
Accordingly, the Complaint is hereby dismissed, with prejudice.
So ordered, this 30th day of March, 2015.
___________________________________
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
1
The Court considered whether the Commissioner erred in finding that Ms. Scott could
perform a reduced range of light work. The one reference to sedentary work at page four of the
transcript was an unintended misstatement.
Case 3:14-cv-00091-BD Document 17 Filed 03/25/15 Page 1 of 14
1
1
2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
JONESBORO DIVISION
3
4
5
6
7
8
SHAMEKA SCOTT,
.
.
PLAINTIFF,
.
.
VS.
.
.
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,.
.
DEFENDANT.
.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Docket No. 3:14-CV-00091-BD
Little Rock, Arkansas
March 19, 2015
9:57 A.M.
9
10
11
TRANSCRIPT OF
12
EXCERPTED ORAL FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
13
IN ORAL ARGUMENT HEARING BY TELEPHONE
14
BEFORE THE HONORABLE BETH DEERE
15
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
16
17
18
ELECTRONIC COURT RECORDER-OPERATOR:
Ms. Suzy Flippen
19
20
21
Transcription Service:
Robin Warbritton
Post Office Box 262
Vilonia, AR 72173
(501) 796-6560
22
23
24
PROCEEDINGS RECORDED BY ELECTRONIC SOUND RECORDING.
25
TRANSCRIPT PRODUCED BY TRANSCRIPTION SERVICE.
Case 3:14-cv-00091-BD Document 17 Filed 03/25/15 Page 2 of 14
2
1
APPEARANCES:
2
For the Plaintiff:
Mr. Greg Wallace
Bartels Law Firm
Post Office Box 1640
Jonesboro, AR 72403-1640
For the Defendant:
Mr. Eric B. Tucker
Social Security Administration
Office of the General Counsel
1301 Young Street
Suite A702
Dallas, TX 75202-5433
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 3:14-cv-00091-BD Document 17 Filed 03/25/15 Page 3 of 14
3
P R O C E E D I N G S
1
2
(Call to order of the Court.)
* * *
3
THE COURT:
4
All right.
I have spent considerable
5
time on the medical records in this case because they are
6
pretty extensive.
7
the case right now than I will at any other time, so I'm
8
prepared to make findings of fact and conclusion -- and reach
9
conclusions, applying the law to the facts at this time.
And I think that I probably know more about
And what I will do is -- we're still trying to figure
10
11
out the procedure, the most efficient procedure for doing
12
this.
13
those conclusions orally here on the record.
14
that transcribed.
15
an order with the transcript attached, along with a judgment.
16
What I will do is, is make those findings and reach
We will have
And in a week or so, I will docket that as
So, here are my findings in the case of Shameka
17
Nicole Scott v. Carolyn Colvin, Acting Commissioner of the
18
Social Security Administration, case number 3:14-CV-91 here in
19
the Eastern District of Arkansas.
20
I find that jurisdiction is proper.
Ms. Scott has
21
cleared all procedural hurdles.
She filed for disability and
22
SSI benefits November 7th, 2011, alleging an onset date of
23
August of 2011.
24
upon reconsideration.
25
had two hearings; one on February 22nd, one on May 10th, 2013,
Her applications were denied initially and
She asked for a hearing.
She actually
Case 3:14-cv-00091-BD Document 17 Filed 03/25/15 Page 4 of 14
4
1
before an Administrative Law Judge.
2
appeared at the second hearing because she alleged not only
3
physical impairments, but also depression, which would be an
4
non-exertional impairment.
On June 13th, 2013, the ALJ issued an unfavorable
5
6
A vocational expert
decision.
The appeals counsel denied her request for review.
Ms. Scott then filed this appeal on April 14, 2014.
7
8
And on April 17th of 2014, the parties consented to the
9
jurisdiction of this Court.
Ms. Scott, I believe, was 27 years old at the time of
10
11
her hearings.
She lived with her three children, who were all
12
minors; a one year old, I think a seven year old, and a nine
13
year old.
14
The standard in this appeal is whether there's legal
15
error and whether there's substantial evidence to support the
16
Commissioner's finding that Ms. Scott had the residual
17
functional capacity to perform a reduced range of sedentary
18
work in spite of her severe impairments.
19
The ALJ, at step two, found that Ms. Scott had
20
several severe impairments; diabetes, diabetic neuropathy,
21
carpal tunnel syndrome, hypertension, and depression.
22
In her brief, Ms. Scott alleges that the ALJ erred in
23
not finding her back pain to be a severe impairment.
But
24
that, of course, is not reversible error because Ms. Scott
25
cleared the step two hurdle, in that the ALJ did find other
Case 3:14-cv-00091-BD Document 17 Filed 03/25/15 Page 5 of 14
5
1
severe impairments and did state in his opinion that he
2
considered all impairments later in the analysis, including
3
non-severe impairments.
4
taken.
So that -- that point is not well
Her argument also is that the ALJ overestimated her
5
6
residual functional capacity because the -- after finding that
7
her carpal tunnel syndrome was a severe impairment, the
8
argument is that there were no restrictions in the residual
9
functional capacity finding to account for her carpal tunnel
10
11
syndrome.
She also argues that her diabetic neuropathy was not
12
adequately considered in the ALJ's finding that she could do a
13
reduced range of light work because light work includes a -- a
14
significant amount of walking that would be precluded by her
15
diabetic neuropathy.
16
Those are her arguments.
Many of the -- the medical records in this case are
17
rather voluminous, almost running to 900 pages.
Many of the
18
records predate her alleged onset date of August 30, 2011.
19
And that includes her diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome,
20
that I believe was made maybe some time in 2008.
21
indicate that at the -- at the end of 2009, in December of
22
2009, the doctor that she saw for carpal tunnel syndrome
23
indicated or prescribed conservative therapy with wrist braces
24
and pain for the -- for the carpal tunnel syndrome and
25
indicated that if that was not sufficient, he would refer her
Records
Case 3:14-cv-00091-BD Document 17 Filed 03/25/15 Page 6 of 14
6
1
for surgical evaluation.
There is no indication that she was
2
ever referred for a nerve conduction study to confirm the
3
carpal tunnel -- carpal tunnel syndrome diagnosis or -- or
4
that she ever had such tests.
Nonetheless, the ALJ did find it to be a severe
5
6
impairment, which, of course, by definition, means that it had
7
more than a minimal effect on her ability to perform work
8
activities.
When I reviewed the medical records from the time of
9
10
her alleged onset date, which would have been August of 2011
11
-- again, there are many, many medical records.
12
and I will run through some of these, many of the records
13
don't relate to -- to her alleged impairments, but many also
14
do.
15
to be her uncontrolled diabetes.
For example,
Her primary problem, from reviewing the records, appears
16
In other words, her blood sugar levels remain high
17
throughout the relevant period, beginning in August of 2011
18
when she went to the doctor for back pain and reported a
19
history of carpal tunnel syndrome and elevated blood sugar
20
levels.
21
that -- at that visit, noted her poor compliance, and
22
attributed her back problems to be conditioning and muscle
23
strain, and encouraged her to exercise.
24
she didn't keep appointments relating to colposcopy, which is
25
a procedure unrelated to any of her alleged impairments.
But even as early of August of 2011, the doctor in
He also noted that
Case 3:14-cv-00091-BD Document 17 Filed 03/25/15 Page 7 of 14
7
She was also evaluated for physical therapy, didn't
1
2
keep that appointment allegedly because she didn't have the
3
money.
4
-- whether finances actually kept her from complying with
5
medical treatment.
But the evidence is -- is unclear about her financial
November, she was back at the ER for blood sugar
6
7
issues.
8
physician, but there is no evidence that she did.
9
She was told to follow up with her primary care
She returned to the doctor in December of 20 -- the
10
end of December of 2011.
11
returned to the Emergency Room, again for elevated blood
12
sugar, but she had not ever seen her primary care physician.
13
I say returned to the doctor, she
On December 29th of 2011, she did see her primary
14
care doctor, but admitted that she had been off insulin
15
September -- since September of that year.
16
Again, I'll discuss later about her allegation that
17
she didn't comply with taking medications because of lack of
18
financial resources.
19
February of 2012, two months later, she went to her
20
primary care doctor for back pain, but her primary care doctor
21
noted that she was not taking medications for carpal tunnel
22
syndrome because it made her drowsy, and he advised her to
23
avoid sitting for long periods and to do more stretching.
24
25
She goes back a month later, in March of 2012, again
with allegations of back pain and uncontrolled blood sugar.
Case 3:14-cv-00091-BD Document 17 Filed 03/25/15 Page 8 of 14
8
1
Again the next month, April of 2012, again for back pain and
2
blood sugar level.
3
She goes back in May, the next month, back to her
4
primary care doctor, who noted that she had multiple vague
5
complaints but no real abnormalities on physical examination.
6
The doctor -- oh, Ms. -- I guess Ms. Scott herself noted that
7
she was not physically active and that most of her -- the
8
doctor noted that most of the problems were due to poorly
9
controlled diabetes.
She went back to the doctor two months later, again
10
11
with back pain.
12
ruptured ovarian cyst, but apparently that was not the case,
13
because when she went for an ultrasound, that diagnosis was
14
rejected.
15
There was a speculation it might be a
She went back for what was possibly a toenail fungus
16
later that month, and at that appointment admitted that she
17
did not follow a diet as recommended and did not take her
18
medications as prescribed.
19
She went -- returned to the doctor in November of
20
2012, again with elevated blood sugar, complaining of
21
depression, nausea, and pain.
22
antidepressant.
23
She was given an
Returned a couple of weeks later complaining of pain,
24
headaches, nausea, neuropathy, pain in her toe, and
25
depression.
Case 3:14-cv-00091-BD Document 17 Filed 03/25/15 Page 9 of 14
9
Returned the next month to the ER, where she was
1
2
diagnosed with a virus.
Later that month, she went to her
3
primary care doctor with allegations of shoulder pain,
4
insomnia, shortness of breath.
5
uncontrolled diabetes, bursitis, and depression.
The doctor diagnosed
The next month, she did see a counselor for the
6
7
depression, was given a Global Assessment Functioning Score of
8
40, which is actually quite low.
She went back the next week, February of 2013, to the
9
10
ER, alleging weakness, shoulder plain [sic] -- shoulder pain,
11
and with elevated blood sugar levels.
She returned to the doctor April 1st, alleging back
12
13
and shoulder pain.
Went to her primary care doctor.
14
Admitted
not going to physical therapy as prescribed.
She was back at the ER in April of 2013, alleging hip
15
16
pain and again uncontrolled blood sugar.
17
noted in the ER that she was -- did not appear to be acutely
18
ill.
19
returned to her primary care doctor, admitted not taking her
20
medications appropriately.
21
The doctor, however,
I think that's when she had pancreatitis.
When she
So, I guess I've gone through this to illustrate she
22
has a consistent history of noncompliance taking her
23
medications, attending therapy, attending counseling.
24
noncompliant with the diabetic diet.
25
exercise recommendations.
She is
She doesn't follow
And the medical records actually
Case 3:14-cv-00091-BD Document 17 Filed 03/25/15 Page 10 of 14
10
1
are replete with examples of this.
Her reason for not taking her medications, for not
2
3
following up with other recommended courses of treatment, is a
4
lack of money.
5
for many, many periods of time, is on Medicaid, and which
6
dispels the notion that money kept her from getting her
7
insulin or other medications that were prescribed.
8
fact, there is nothing in the record to show that she was ever
9
refused treatment because of a lack of money.
But the record also shows that she, at least
And, in
And many, if
10
not most, of these records are from AHEC, which is a clinic
11
that is particularly for people with limited financial means.
So, there is really not sufficient evidence to find
12
13
that a lack of funds can account for her -- for her
14
noncompliance.
15
the doctor noted that she was having family members bring in
16
food that was not on the diabetic diet that she was supposed
17
to be on.
18
And, in fact, on one of her hospital visits,
So, the issue here is, really comes down to one of
19
credibility and whether the ALJ erred in discounting her
20
subjective complaints or subjective reports of her limitations
21
and her pain.
22
allegations and included -- included some restrictions in her
23
residual functional capacity to account for her subjective
24
allegations.
25
reviewing doctors based on Ms. Scott's testimony of her
And so, the ALJ did credit her subjection
And, in fact, gave little weight to the
Case 3:14-cv-00091-BD Document 17 Filed 03/25/15 Page 11 of 14
11
1
subjective complaints.
In addition, as I noted, the ALJ considered both her
2
3
severe and non-severe impairments when he limited her to a
4
reduced level of light work.
The question then is whether the ALJ gave sufficient
5
6
reason for discounting the severity of Ms. Scott's complaints.
7
And I find that he did.
8
her subjective complaints.
9
medical evidence.
He gave good reasons for discounting
First, the lack of objective
And while this alone is not enough to
10
discount subjective complaints, there -- there was never -- as
11
noted, there was never a nerve conduction study to establish
12
the severity of her carpal tunnel syndrome, and that's --
13
that's just one example.
14
indicating mild or moderate evidence of -- to support her
15
subjective complaints.
Many, many medical records
In addition, the ALJ was -- properly considered her
16
17
lack of compliance in taking medications and abiding by her
18
diet.
19
that's not something that is dispositive, but it is relevant.
20
She had three minor children, although she did testify that
21
her sisters helped her with the one year old, but she also had
22
daughters, 7 and 9.
23
Also, her activities of daily living.
And again,
She took care of her own personal needs.
She testified she didn't do much housework, or if she
24
did housework that it -- that it made her extremely tired.
25
But she did pay her own bills, handled her own money.
She had
Case 3:14-cv-00091-BD Document 17 Filed 03/25/15 Page 12 of 14
12
1
-- had achieved a GED certificate and had one year of college,
2
was able to get along with family and authority figures.
3
was able to drive and, in fact, owned her own car.
4
She
The ALJ also considered some inconsistent statements.
5
There is some inconsistency, in that one place in the record
6
she says that she never smoked, and another place where she
7
was a reformed former smoker, and testimony that she didn't
8
drink at all versus that she drank one beer a week.
9
I'm going to ignore that.
I mean, that's -- I don't
10
think that -- I don't think that that was a significant
11
inconsistency.
12
However, I do think there's an inconsistency in
13
blaming her noncompliance on a lack of funds, but regularly
14
using the services of AHEC, and the records that show that she
15
was on Medicaid for a significant period of time, and was
16
apparently on and off.
17
know why she was on Medicaid at some times and off on others.
18
And there is no explanation.
I don't
But, clearly, she was on Medicaid for some good
19
portion of the time.
20
that that's the reason she didn't take her insulin as
21
prescribed.
22
So, it's -- it's inconsistent to say
So, all of these are legally sufficient reasons for
23
discounting Ms. Scott's subjective complaints of her symptoms.
24
And certainly, there is evidence supporting the plaintiff's
25
position, including the carpal tunnel syndrome and the -- the
Case 3:14-cv-00091-BD Document 17 Filed 03/25/15 Page 13 of 14
13
1
lack of specific restrictions for that, and yet, the -- the
2
limit to a reduced range of light work was a consideration of
3
the carpal tunnel, in that there were lifting restrictions and
4
postural limits included in the residual functional capacity.
5
I'm not allowed to reverse because there's evidence
6
that would support the plaintiff's position.
I'm obligated to
7
affirm the Commissioner if there is substantial evidence
8
viewing the record as a whole.
9
decision to deny Ms. Scott benefits is supported by more than
And here, the Commissioner's
10
substantial evidence when you look at the record as a whole.
11
The Commissioner considered all of Ms. Scott's impairments,
12
both severe as -- and non-severe, and I find that the ALJ
13
committed no legal error that could justify reversal.
14
And those complete my findings and conclusions.
15
And again, I will have those transcribed and appended
16
to my order and a judgment to reflect that decision.
17
Is there anything further, Mr. Wallace?
18
MR. WALLACE:
19
THE COURT:
20
No, Your Honor.
Yes.
Thank you.
Well, thank you.
done an excellent job for your client.
Again, you've
21
And, Mr. Tucker, thank you, as well.
22
And we're off the record.
23
MR. TUCKER:
24
MR. WALLACE:
25
Thank you, Your Honor.
Thank you.
(Adjournment at 10:43 a.m.)
Case 3:14-cv-00091-BD Document 17 Filed 03/25/15 Page 14 of 14
14
1
ELECTRONIC SOUND RECORDING CERTIFICATION:
2
I, court approved transcriber, certify that the foregoing is a
3
correct transcript from the official electronic sound
4
recording of the proceedings in the above-entitled matter.
5
6
/s/Robin Warbritton
Signature of Approved Transcriber
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Robin Warbritton
Typed or Printed Name
March 25, 2015
Date
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?