Brown v. Colvin

Filing 15

ORDER adopting Report and Recommendations re 14 Report and Recommendations: The Court hereby ORDERS that Magistrate Judge Baxter's September 28, 2015 Report-Recommendation is ADOPTED in its entirety for the reasons set forth therein; and the Court further ORDERS that Defendant's motion for judgment on the pleadings is GRANTED; and the Court further ORDERS that the Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment in Defendant's favor and close this case. Signed by U.S. District Judge Mae A. D'Agostino on 12/9/15. (ban)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
____________________________________________
JOANNA S. BROWN, on behalf of AB,
Plaintiff,
vs.

5:14-cv-1059
(MAD/ATB)

CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner
of Social Security,
Defendant.
____________________________________________
APPEARANCES:

OF COUNSEL:

STANLEY LAW OFFICES
215 Burnet Avenue
Syracuse, New York 13203
Attorneys for Plaintiff

JAYA A. SHURTLIFF, ESQ.

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
Office of Regional General Counsel
Region II
26 Federal Plaza – Room 3904
New York, New York 10278
Attorneys for Defendant

DAVID L. BROWN, ESQ.

Mae A. D'Agostino, U.S. District Judge:
ORDER
Plaintiff Joanna Brown filed an application for Supplemental Security Income ("SSI")
payments on behalf of her daughter, A.B., on December 2, 2010, claiming a disability onset date
of October 5, 2002. See Administrative Transcript ("T.") at 11, 149-54. Plaintiff application was
initially denied on May 6, 2011, and Plaintiff made a timely request for a hearing before an
Administrative Law Judge ("ALJ"). In a decision dated January 8, 2013, the ALJ found that A.B.
was not disabled and denied the application. See id. at 8-23. The ALJ's decision became the

Commissioner's final decision on August 12, 2014, when the Appeals Council denied Plaintiff's
request for review. See id. at 1-4.
On August 27, 2014, Plaintiff commenced this action and presented the following
arguments: (1) the ALJ erred in his determination that A.B.'s impairments were not functionally
equivalent to "the listings;" and (2) the ALJ did not properly weight the medical evidence. See
Dkt. No. 12 at 10-16. In a September 28, 2015 Report-Recommendation, Magistrate Judge
Baxter recommended that the Court grant Defendant's motion for judgment on the pleadings and
dismiss this case. See Dkt. No. 14. Neither party objected to the Report-Recommendation, which
is now before the Court.
When reviewing the Commissioner's final decision, the court must determine whether the
Commissioner applied the correct legal standards and whether substantial evidence supports the
decision. See Urtz v. Callahan, 965 F. Supp. 324, 326 (N.D.N.Y. 1997) (citing Johnson v.
Bowen, 817 F.2d 983, 985 (2d Cir. 1987)). Although the Commissioner is ultimately responsible
for determining a claimant's eligibility, an Administrative Law Judge ("ALJ") makes the actual
disability determination; and that decision is subject to judicial review on appeal. A court may
not affirm an ALJ's decision if it reasonably doubts that the ALJ applied the proper legal
standards, even if it appears that the ALJ's decision is supported by substantial evidence. See
Johnson v. Bowen, 817 F.2d 983, 986 (2d Cir. 1987). Additionally, the ALJ must set forth the
crucial factors justifying his findings with sufficient specificity to allow a court to determine
whether substantial evidence supports the decision. See Ferraris v. Heckler, 728 F.2d 582, 587
(2d Cir. 1984) (citation omitted).
When a party makes specific objections to a magistrate judge's report, the district court
engages in de novo review of the issues raised in the objections. See Farid v. Bouey, 554 F. Supp.
2

2d 301, 307 (N.D.N.Y. 2008) (citation omitted). When a party fails to make specific objections,
however, the court reviews the magistrate judge's report for clear error. See id.; see also Gamble
v. Barnhart, No. 02CV1126, 2004 WL 2725126, *1 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 29, 2004) (citations omitted).
Having reviewed Magistrate Judge Baxter's Report-Recommendation, the parties'
submissions, the underlying record, and the applicable law, the Court concludes that Magistrate
Judge Baxter correctly determined that the Court should affirm the Commissioner's decision
denying Plaintiff's application for SSI benefits. In deciding that A.B.'s impairments do not meet
or medically equal a listed impairment, the ALJ considered, among other things, the testimony of
A.B.'s teachers, Plaintiff, and A.B. herself, as well as A.B.'s school and medical records. The ALJ
applied the correct legal standard and the decision was supported by substantial evidence.
Moreover, the ALJ properly weighed the medical opinion evidence. The ALJ fully explained the
decision to give Plaintiff's treating physician, Dr. Dunbar, equal weight to the opinions of other
medical opinions in the record. The ALJ described in detail the substantial evidence presented
that contradicted the treating physician's opinions and discussed the brief and limited nature of
Dr. Dunbar's "treating" relationship with A.B. See T. at 15-17. Accordingly, the Court finds that
Magistrate Judge Baxter correctly determined that the Court should grant Defendant's motion for
judgment on the pleadings and dismiss this case.
Based on the foregoing, the Court hereby
ORDERS that Magistrate Judge Baxter's September 28, 2015 Report-Recommendation is
ADOPTED in its entirety for the reasons set forth therein; and the Court further
ORDERS that Defendant's motion for judgment on the pleadings is GRANTED; and the
Court further

3

ORDERS that the Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment in Defendant's favor and close
this case; and the Court further
ORDERS that the Clerk of the Court shall serve a copy of this Order on the parties in
accordance with the Local Rules.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: December 9, 2015
Albany, New York

4