Source: https://www.mattgreenbaum.com/1999/10/07/the-use-of-a-medical-expert-in-a-social-security-disability-case/
Timestamp: 2019-04-25 20:33:37+00:00

Document:
Some Thoughts on Cross-Examination and the Weight(lessness) of the Evidence.
Examines patient once only for purpose of providing diagnosis.
SSA required to send claimant for CE whenever examination will aid in bringing out relevant facts.
Purpose is to read medical evidence in file to determine whether listing is met or equalled and to determine R.F.C.
Claimant may bring his own medical expert.
Every circuit but the Seventh Circuit, favors treating physicians.
Treating physician’s report is to be accorded “considerable weight.” Moore v. Sullivan, 919 F.2d 901 (5th Cir. 1990).
Though not binding, the treating physician’s reports are given greater weight than a consulting physician’s report, absent good cause. Scott v. Heckler, 770 F.2d 482 (5th Cir. 1986).
Report not supported by clinical findings. Shipley v. Secretary, 812 F2.d 934 (5th Cir. 1987).
Contradictory Statements of other physicians. Hollis v. Bowen, 832 F.2d 865 (5th Cir. 1987).
Treating physician not accorded greater weight than consultative report. Adams v. Bowen, 833 F.2d 509 (5th Cir. 1987).
Specialist’s report accorded grater weight than non- specialist’s report. Moore v. Sullivan, 919 F.2d 901 (5th Cir. 1990).
May cause conflict where consultative physician is specialist and treating physician is general practitioner.
ALJ has discretion to reject opinion of physician if evidence is to contrary. Bradley v. Bowen, 809 F.2d 1054 (5th Cir. 1987).
Should be more than review physician, because of cross- examination, his ability to observe claimant, and his review of the most current medical evidence.
Develop a theory of case which supports contention that claimant is disabled.
Identify all portions of the record which support theory.
Determine whether the doctor is qualified to testify as an expert.
Try to ascertain what doctor’s testimony has been in prior similar cases.
Try to ascertain what has happened in prior similar cases where this ALJ uses an M.E.
Try to determine when this ALJ typically utilizes this M.E.
Never question an M.E. who has testified that a listing is met or equalled, except as to onset date.
Never ask an M.E. why he feels claimant is not disabled.
Be ready to try to minimize impact of M.E.’s adverse testimony.
Claimant’s treating physician is in better position to evaluate claimant’s medical condition.
Methods for measuring pain and how effect of pain is determined.
Testimony is based solely on review of records and claimant’s demeanor.
Would be better able to assess claimant’s condition if could examine him.
Where M.E. says listing is not met, have him document those parts of medical record that demonstrate that certain aspects of listing are met.
Don’t ask the M.E. a question to which you don’t know the answer or where you suspect a negative answer.
An M.E. is a non-examining doctor and his opinion carries little weight.
Don’t ask why the M.E. does not agree with the treating physician. You are just giving the ALJ ammunition.
Obtain a supplemental report from the treating physician, following the hearing, which contradicts the M.E.
Make sure the M.E. has seen all the evidence you want him to see. OHA often fails to provide M.E. with latest exhibits.
A listed impairment for which one or more of the specified medical findings is missing from the evidence but for which other medical findings of equal or greater clinical significance and relating to the same impairment are present in the medical evidence.
An unlisted impairment, in which the set of criteria for the most closely analogous listed impairment is used for comparison with the findings of the unlisted impairment.
A combination of impairments (none of which meet or equal a listed impairment), each manifested by a set of symptoms, signs or laboratory findings, which combined, are determined to be medically equivalent in medical severity to that listed set to which the combined sets can be most closely related. SSR 83-19.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.