Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-89-03291/USCOURTS-ca10-89-03291-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Charles R. Murtagh
Appellant
Louis W. Sullivan
Appellee

Document Text:

FILED 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT 

United States Court of .Appeals 

Tenth Circuit 

Y 21 1990 

.ROBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk 

CHARLES R. MURTAGH, ) 

) 

Plaintiff-Appellant, ) 

) 

V • ) 

) 

LOUIS W. SULLIVAN, M.D., Secretary) 

of Health and Human Services, ) 

) 

Defendant-Appellee. ) 

No. 89-3291 

(D. C. No. 88-2531-0) 

( D. Kan.) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

Before MOORE, BRORBY, and EBEL, 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(1); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. 

submitted without oral argument. 

The cause is therefore ordered 

This is a prose appeal from a denial of Social Security 

benefits. 

* 

be 

for 

res 

This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall not 

cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, except 

purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of the case, 

judicata, or collateral estoppel. 10th Cir. R. 36.3. 

Appellate Case: 89-3291 Document: 01019970257 Date Filed: 05/21/1990 Page: 1 
Mr. Murtagh applied for disability benefits, alleging at age 

thirty-three he was no longer able to work due to a spinal injury 

suffered at age twelve or thirteen with subsequent deterioration 

and degeneration. He also alleges he suffers from a mental 

impairment--severe depression. 

Mr. Murtagh had numerous medical examinations over a twentyyear period. The district court, in a thorough and detailed 

memorandum and order, reviewed the medical history. Speaking 

broadly, most doctors agreed that Mr. Murtagh had a significant 

back problem which caused pain, but that he could be usefully 

employed in a variety of jobs. There was also conflicting 

evidence which tended to substantiate Mr. Murtagh's claims. Mr. 

Murtagh also suffered from depression, probably caused by his 

chronic pain and his inability to support his family. However, a 

psychiatrist testified that Mr. Murtagh had no medically 

determinable psychiatric impairment. 

The administrative law judge concluded that Mr. Murtagh was 

not under a disability and that Mr. Murtagh was able to perform a 

full range of light work activity. 

The district court reviewed the evidence, recognized the 

conflicting evidence and determined that the administrative law 

judge's findings concerning disability were supported by 

-2-

Appellate Case: 89-3291 Document: 01019970257 Date Filed: 05/21/1990 Page: 2 
• 

substantial evidence. The district court the r efore affirmed the 

decision of the Secretary. 

Mr. Murtagh asserts on appeal that the evidence supporting 

his claim was not given sufficient weight and that the evidence 

against him was given too much weight. What Mr. Murtagh does not 

realize is that this court cannot re-weigh the evidence. The task 

of weighing the evidence falls upon the administrative law judge. 

He is the person who saw and heard the witnesses. This court 

reviews the record to determine if the administrative law judge's 

findings are supported by substantial evidence. They are. 

We therefore AFFIRM the decision of the district court. 

Entered for the Court: 

WADE BRORBY 

Circuit Judge 

-3-

Appellate Case: 89-3291 Document: 01019970257 Date Filed: 05/21/1990 Page: 3