Opinion ID: 166408
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: the a dministrative r ecord

Text: Tom argues that the ALJ should have ordered a consultative examination to assess her post-surgery limitations. Specifically, Tom asserts that there is no evidence to support the ALJ’s findings that Tom’s surgery was successful and involved a short convalescence. We disagree. An ALJ has the duty to “order a consultative exam when evidence in the record establishes the reasonable possibility of the existence of a disability and the result of the consultative exam could reasonably be expected to be of material assistance in resolving the issue of disability.” Hawkins v. Chater , 113 F.3d 1162, 1169 (10th Cir. 1997). But when, as here, the social security claimant is represented at the hearing by counsel who fails to request a consultative exam, the -4- ALJ’s duty is triggered only when the need for a consultative exam is “ clearly established in the record.” Id. at 1168 (emphasis added). Although a post-surgery consultative examination might have been helpful to test the continuing validity of Dr. Temple’s post-operative observation that Tom was “just doing wonderfully,” we cannot conclude that the record “clearly” establishes the need for another consultative examination, Hawkins , 113 F.3d at 1168; cf. Howard v. Barnhart , 379 F.3d 945, 949 (10th Cir. 2004) (concluding that the passage of time between the consultative examination and the disability hearing did not warrant another consultative exam to assess the claimant’s continuing chest pain, because there was evidence that the pain was not disabling).