Source: http://ar.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.20190404_0000563.WAR.htm/qx
Timestamp: 2020-07-15 12:02:12
Document Index: 778779842

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 405', '§ 405', '§ 423', '§ 423', '§ 404', '§ 404']

FindACase™ | Newsom v. Berryhill
Newsom v. Berryhill
CRYSTAL G. NEWSOM PLAINTIFF
Plaintiff, Crystal G. Newsom, brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), seeking judicial review of a decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration (Commissioner) denying her claims for a period of disability and disability insurance benefits (DIB) under the provisions of Title II of the Social Security Act (Act). In this judicial review, the Court must determine whether there is substantial evidence in the administrative record to support the Commissioner's decision. See 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).
Plaintiff protectively filed her current application for DIB on September 30, 2015, alleging an inability to work since May 14, 2012, [1] due to damage to the cervical spine, damage to the thoracic spine, damage to the lumbar spine, neuropathy in the legs, osteoarthritis in the back, arthritis, high blood pressure, vision problems, dental problems and depression. (Tr. 89, 227). An administrative hearing was held on October 24, 2016, at which Plaintiff appeared with counsel and testified. (Tr. 50-87).
By written decision dated April 19, 2017, the ALJ found that during the relevant time period, Plaintiff had an impairment or combination of impairments that were severe. (Tr. 36). Specifically, the ALJ found Plaintiff had the following severe impairments: hypertension, spondylosis of the cervical spine, degenerative disc disease of the lumbar spine, depression and a generalized anxiety disorder. However, after reviewing all of the evidence presented, the ALJ determined that Plaintiff's impairments did not meet or equal the level of severity of any impairment listed in the Listing of Impairments found in Appendix I, Subpart P, Regulation No. 4. (Tr. 36). The ALJ found Plaintiff retained the residual functional capacity (RFC) to:
perform light work as defined in 20 CFR 404.1567(b) except she is limited to jobs involving simple tasks and simple instructions with incidental contact with the public.
(Tr. 38). With the help of a vocational expert, the ALJ determined Plaintiff could perform work as a router, a cleaner/housekeeper and a price marking clerk. (Tr. 44).
Plaintiff then requested a review of the hearing decision by the Appeals Council, which after reviewing additional evidence submitted by Plaintiff denied that request on February 20, 2018. (Tr. 1-6). Subsequently, Plaintiff filed this action. (Doc. 1). Both parties have filed appeal briefs, and the case is before the undersigned for report and recommendation. (Docs. 13, 14).
It is well established that a claimant for Social Security disability benefits has the burden of proving her disability by establishing a physical or mental disability that has lasted at least one year and that prevents her from engaging in any substantial gainful activity. Pearsall v. Massanari, 274 F.3d 1211, 1217 (8th Cir.2001); see also 42 U.S.C. § 423(d)(1)(A). The Act defines “physical or mental impairment” as “an impairment that results from anatomical, physiological, or psychological abnormalities which are demonstrable by medically acceptable clinical and laboratory diagnostic techniques.” 42 U.S.C. § 423(d)(3). A Claimant must show that her disability, not simply her impairment, has lasted for at least twelve consecutive months.
The Commissioner's regulations require her to apply a five-step sequential evaluation process to each claim for disability benefits: (1) whether the claimant has engaged in substantial gainful activity since filing her claim; (2) whether the claimant has a severe physical and/or mental impairment or combination of impairments; (3) whether the impairment(s) meet or equal an impairment in the listings; (4) whether the impairment(s) prevent the claimant from doing past relevant work; and (5) whether the claimant is able to perform other work in the national economy given her age, education, and experience. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520. Only if the final stage is reached does the fact finder consider the Claimant's age, education, and work experience in light of her residual functional capacity. See McCoy v. Schweiker, 683 F.2d 1138, 1141-42 (8th Cir. 1982); 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520.