Strickland v. Astrue
Filing
14
OPINION on Summary Judgment. (Signed by Judge Lynn N. Hughes) Parties notified. (ghassan, )
Richard Alan Strickland,
Plaintiffs.
versus
Michael J . Astrue
Defendants.
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
Civil Action H-I 1-04213
Opinion on Summary Judgment
I.
Introduction.
The question is whether substantial evidence supports the commissioner's decision that
Richard Strickland is not disabled under the Social Security Act. It does.
2.
Standard of review.
Strickland brought this action for judicial review of the commissioner's final decision
to deny his disability insurance benefits. See 42 U.S.C. S 405 (g) (2005).
Judicial review is limited to determining whether there is substantial evidence in the
record to support the commissioner's decision. This is a level of proof that a reasonable mind
would accept as adequate to support a conclusion. Richardson v. Perales , 4 0 2 U.S. 389, 401
A
( 1 ~ ~ 1 )decision
.
unsupported by substantial evidence must be overturned. It would be
arbitrary, failing the requirement that governmental process be regular. U.S. Const. amend. V
3.
Statutory Criteria.
T h e law has a five-step evaluation process to determine whether a claimant is disabled.
First, a claimant is not disabled if he works for substantial gain. Second, a claimant is not
disabled unless he has been medically impaired for at least twelve months. Third, a claimant
is not disabled unless his impairment meets or equals one listed in appendix I of the regulation.
Fourth, if the commissioner has yet to make a determination, he will consider the effects of the
claimant's impairments on his capacity to work. Ifthe claimant is able to perform his past work,
he is not disabled. Fifth, a claimant is not disabled if he can adjust to other work.
20
C.F.R. ยง
404.1 52o(a) (4) (2012).
4.
Evidcncc.
A.
Background.
Strickland is a 3 5-year,old man who says that he suffers from gastrointestinal problems,
orthostatic hypotension, vertigo, anxiety, panic disorder, major depression, and depersonalization disorder. He says his mental conditions impair his ability to make rational work.
related decisions, concentrate, and interact normally with others. He also says that anxiety and
spells of dizziness limit his ability to drive.
Strickland has a general education degree. He has worked as a utility locator, retail sales
clerk, fence installer, furniture assembler, deck-restoration worker, and general laborer. W h e n
he applied for disability insurance benefits on March 2,
2010,
he said that his disability had
begun on July 28, 2009.
T h e administrative law judge concluded that Strickland could not perform any of his
past work but could perform light, unskilled work in positions such as mail clerk, laundry press
operator, office helper, and office cleaner, with limitations on work hours and heavy lifting.
B.
Application.
T h e administrative lawjudge properly found that Strickland was not disabled, correctly
following procedure.
First, Strickland has not been gainfully employed. Second, Strickland has been impaired
for more than twelve months. Third, none of Strickland's impairments met one listed. Fourth,
the judge determined that Strickland would be unable to perform his past work because of his
physical and mental limitations. Fifth, the judge considered the combined effects of Strickland's
impairments and correctly concluded that he could adjust to another type of work.
TO
determine whether Strickland was disabled, the judge considered all of the evidence
from 2009 to
2010.
Strickland says he is unable to work because of his mental and physical
impairments, yet there is evidence that he has not been entirely compliant in taking his
medications. Further, his description of his functional inabilities appears exagerated when
compared to the doctors' opinions in evidence. Lastly, although Strickland says he is unable
to work, he reported that he regularly helps with yard work and chores, drives one to four miles
three times per week, prepares meals, plays the guitar, surfs the internet, and watches television.
Ample evidence in the record shows that despite some limitations, Strickland is still capable
of performing light work to earn an income.
5.
Conclusion.
T h e commissioner's decision denying Ric hard Strickland's claim for disability insurance
is supported by substantial evidence and will be affirmed. Strickland will take nothing from
Michael J. Astrue.
Signed on October 22, 2012, at Houston, Texas.
Lynn N. Highehes
I
United States District Judge
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?