Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-90-03269/USCOURTS-ca10-90-03269-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 863
Nature of Suit: Social Security - DIWC/DIWW (405(g))
Cause of Action: 

---

I 

li 

FI LED 

Uoited States Court of Appeals 

Tenth Cir~uit 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

TENTH CIRCUIT 

APR 19 1991 

.ROBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk ROGER L. LONG, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v. 

LOUIS W. SULLIVAN, M.D., 

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN 

SERVICES OF THE UNITED STATES, 

Defendant-Appellee. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

No. 90-3269 

(D. Kansas) 

(D.C. No. 89-4044) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

Before ANDERSON, TACHA, and BRORBY, Circuit Judges. 

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel 

has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially 

assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 

34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The cause is therefore ordered 

submitted without oral argument. 

Roger L. Long appeals from a district court order affirming 

the decision of the Secretary of Health and Human Services, which 

reversed the Administrative Law Judge's grant of Social Security 

disability benefits to him under Title II of the Social Security 

Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 401, et seq. 

* This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall 

not be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, 

except for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of 

the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. 10th Cir. R. 

36.3. 

Appellate Case: 90-3269 Document: 010110034247 Date Filed: 04/19/1991 Page: 1 
' \ 

Long argues that the Secretary's decision was not supported 

by substantial evidence. Specifically, Long asserts that the 

Appeals Council improperly disregarded the Administrative Law 

Judge's findings concerning his credibility and summarily 

dismissed the opinion of the Social Security Administration's own 

medical expert concerning the onset date of Long's disability. We 

disagree and affirm. 

Our task in a case of this sort is to review the decision of 

the Secretary, not that of the ALJ. On consideration of the 

record as a whole, if the Secretary's findings are supported by 

substantial evidence, we must affirm. Campbell v. Bowen, 822 F.2d 

1518, 1521 (10th Cir. 1987) (citing 42 u.s.c. § 405(g)). We note, 

however, that "where the Secretary, acting through the Appeals 

Council, overturns a decision of the ALJ granting benefits, and, 

in so doing, differs with the ALJ's assessment of witness credibility, the Secretary should fully articulate his reasons for so 

doing, and then, with heightened scrutiny, we must decide whether 

such reasons find support in the record." Fierro v. Bowen, 798 

F.2d 1351, 1355 (10th Cir. 1986) (citations omitted). Accord 

Sorenson v. Bowen, 888 F.2d 706, 710-11 (10th Cir. 1989) (per 

curiam). 

The central issue in this appeal is whether the record 

contains substantial evidence to support the Appeals Council's 

conclusion that Long did not carry the burden of establishing his 

disability prior to the expiration of his insured status on 

December 30, 1981. Only by establishing his disability prior to 

this date, Markham v. Califano, 601 F.2d 533, 534-45 (10th Cir. 

-2-

Appellate Case: 90-3269 Document: 010110034247 Date Filed: 04/19/1991 Page: 2 
1979), can Long meet the earnings requirement specified in 42 

u.s.c. §§ 416(i) and 423(c), and thus qualify for disability 

benefits. 

To establish his disability, Long must provide medical 

evidence of a severe impairment during the relevant time period. 

20 C.F.R. § 404.1512(b). In this case, then, Long must come 

forward with medical evidence predating the expiration of his 

insured status on December 30, 1981. Long's own statements about 

the severity of his impairment at that time are insufficient to 

meet the threshold of medical evidence required to establish a 

disability. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1508; Bernal v. Bowen, 851 F.2d 297, 

300 (10th Cir. 1988). 

Long has failed to carry this burden. The record is devoid 

of any medical evidence establishing a disability prior to 

December 30, 1981. No medical evidence of record supports Long's 

claim that he received treatment at Veterans' Administration 

hospitals in 1975 and 1978. Neither does the medical evidence 

closest to December 30, 1981, reasonably suggest that an impairment existed prior to that date. Indeed, those medical records, 

dated 1983, specifically contradict Long's claim: "The patient 

states he has never been admitted to a psychiatric hospital 

before. Past Medical History: He has had no medical hospitalizations, no surgeries. Denies any medical history." R. Vol. II 

at 198. And, plainly, medical evidence suggesting that Long is 

presently severely impaired is not determinative of his condition 

in 1981. 

-3-

Appellate Case: 90-3269 Document: 010110034247 Date Filed: 04/19/1991 Page: 3 
The Social Security Administration medical advisor who 

reviewed Long's written records and sat in on Long's administrative hearing, opined that Long's disability dated back to 1972, 

when "his aggressive behavior started to be documented .. II R. 

Vol. II at 72. But because no medical evidence of record supported this view, the Council was convinced that the medical 

advisor's opinion was based solely on Long's own testimony about 

his condition, a plainly insufficient basis on which to determine 

disability within the meaning of the Social Security Act. The 

Council, therefore, concluded that the testimony of the medical 

advisor was not persuasive. 

We believe that the Appeals Council fully articulated its 

reasons for reversing the Administrative Law Judge's decision and 

that the record evidence amply supports the reasons for this 

determination. The decision of the Secretary of Health and Human 

Services is, therefore, AFFIRMED. 

ENTERED FOR THE COURT 

Stephen H. Anderson 

Circuit Judge 

-4-

Appellate Case: 90-3269 Document: 010110034247 Date Filed: 04/19/1991 Page: 4