Source: http://al.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.20190326_0000433.MAL.htm/qx
Timestamp: 2019-10-19 20:39:02
Document Index: 20872330

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 405', '§ 636', '§405', '§ 423', '§ 423', '§ 404', '§ 423', '§ 423', '§ 404']

DAVID HILL, Plaintiff,
STEPHEN DOYLE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
David Hill (“Plaintiff”) applied for disability insurance benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act in February 2014, alleging a disability date of August 27, 2013. (R. 110). Plaintiff's application was initially denied in July 2014. Id. Plaintiff filed a written request for a hearing, which was held in July 2015; following this hearing, the Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) denied Plaintiff's claim. (R. 110-118). Plaintiff requested a review of the decision, which was granted, and the Appeals Council remanded the case to the ALJ. (R. 125-27). The ALJ held a second hearing in January 2017, (R. 30-67), and ultimately denied Plaintiff's claim. (R. 10-19). The Appeals Council denied Plaintiff's second request for review. (R. 1-3). As a result, the ALJ's decision became the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner”). Id. Judicial review proceeds pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), and 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). After careful scrutiny of the record and briefs, for the reasons below, the Court concludes that the Commissioner's decision is to be REVERSED and REMANDED.
“The Social Security Act mandates that ‘findings of the Secretary as to any fact, if supported by substantial evidence, shall be conclusive.'” Foote v. Chater, 67 F.3d 1553, 1560 (11th Cir. 1995) (quoting 42 U.S.C. §405(g)). Substantial evidence is more than a scintilla-i.e., the evidence must do more than merely create a suspicion of the existence of a fact, and must include such relevant evidence as a reasonable person would accept as adequate to support the conclusion. Lewis v. Callahan, 125 F.3d 1436, 1440 (11th Cir. 1997) (citing Richardson v. Perales, 402 U.S. 389, 401, 91 S.Ct. 1420, 1427, 28 L.Ed.2d 842 (1971)); Foote, 67 F.3d at 1560 (citing Walden v. Schweiker, 672 F.2d 835, 838 (11th Cir. 1982)).
There is no presumption that the Commissioner's conclusions of law are valid, and the Court may reverse the ALJ's decision if it fails to provide sufficient reasoning to determine that the Commissioner properly applied the law. Keeton v. Dep't of Health and Human Servs., 21 F.3d 1064, 1066 (11th Cir. 1994) (citing Cornelius v. Sullivan, 936 F.2d 1143, 1145 (11th Cir. 1991)); Brown v. Sullivan, 921 F.2d 1233, 1236 (11th Cir. 1991) (quoting MacGregor, 786 F.2d at 1053).
The Social Security Act's general disability insurance benefits program (“DIB”) provides income to individuals who are forced into involuntary, premature retirement, provided they are both insured and disabled, regardless of indigence. See 42 U.S.C. § 423(a). Applicants under DIB must prove “disability” within the meaning of the Social Security Act. See 42 U.S.C. §§ 423(d), 1382c(a)(3), 1382c(a)(3)(G); 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1505(a), 416.905(a). A person is entitled to disability benefits when the person is unable to “[e]ngage in any substantial gainful activity by reason of any medically determinable physical or mental impairment which can be expected to result in death or which has lasted or can be expected to last for a continuous period of not less than 12 months.” 42 U.S.C. §§ 423(d)(1)(A), 1382c(a)(3)(A). A “physical or mental impairment” is one resulting from anatomical, physiological, or psychological abnormalities which are demonstrable by medically acceptable clinical and laboratory diagnostic techniques. 42 U.S.C. §§ 423(d)(3), 1382c(a)(3)(D).
The Commissioner of Social Security employs the below five-step, sequential evaluation process to determine whether a claimant is entitled to benefits. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920 (2010).