Opinion ID: 713714
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The ALJ's Decision to Disregard the Treating Physician's Opinion

Text: 7 Martinson contends that the ALJ's conclusion that she was able to perform light or sedentary work was not supported by substantial evidence because the ALJ improperly rejected her treating physician's ultimate conclusion as to the severity of her disability and her inability to work. 8 On May 28, 1991, Dr. Fairfax concluded that Martinson was quite severely disabled and unable to perform any work activity on a sustained basis due to her severe chronic lung disease. While this opinion is not necessarily conclusive as to the ultimate issue of disability, the ALJ must have clear and convincing reasons to reject Dr. Fairfax's opinion because Dr. Fairfax was Martinson's treating physician. Magallanes, 881 F.2d at 751. The ALJ must set forth specific legitimate reasons for rejecting Dr. Fairfax's opinion, and the decision to reject Dr. Fairfax's opinion must be supported by substantial evidence. Rodrigues v. Bowen, 876 F.2d 759, 762 (9th Cir.1989). 9 The ALJ rejected Dr. Fairfax's opinion because the ALJ found that other evidence provided by Dr. Fairfax indicated that Martinson's condition was stable and that her condition did not affect her ability to sit, balance, or lift light objects and so contradicted the doctor's conclusion that Martinson could not do sustained work. This contradiction, apparent rather than real, is not a clear and convincing reason for rejecting Dr. Fairfax's ultimate conclusion that Martinson was unable to work. 10 First, Dr. Fairfax's notes indicating that Martinson's condition was stable do not undermine Dr. Fairfax's conclusion that Martinson is unable to work. Dr. Fairfax found Martinson's condition to be stable during a period in which she was not working, performing little in the way of household chores, going out infrequently, and taking frequent rests throughout the day. Significantly, there was no evidence in the record that Martinson's condition would continue to be stable if she resumed work. See Rodriguez, 876 F.2d at 762 (finding that doctor's statement that claimant was responding to treatment was not a clear and convincing reason for rejecting doctor's opinion that claimant was able to work only for a maximum of four hours per day). Rather, the record suggests that her condition would worsen if she returned to work--when she had been working she had frequent attacks, some of which required her to be hospitalized. 11 Second, Dr. Fairfax's opinion that Martinson could lift 20 pounds very infrequently, could frequently lift 10 pounds, and that her condition did not impair her ability to sit or balance do not necessarily indicate Martinson could work. The ability to do sustained work requires more than the retention of those simple abilities. Hence, that Martinson retains these abilities does not provide a clear and convincing basis for rejecting Dr. Fairfax's opinion. 12 The Vocational Expert's opinion that Martinson could work at light or sedentary jobs such as taking tickets, bill collecting, acting as a customer service representative, also does not provide a clear and convincing basis for rejecting Dr. Fairfax's opinion. First, the Vocational Expert's opinion does not adequately take into account Martinson's need to avoid public contact. Martinson testified that she was unable to continue working as an office manager in part because contact with the people in the office would expose her to viruses and bacteria to which her condition leaves her particularly vulnerable. Several, if not all, of the jobs listed by the Vocational Expert require a significant amount of contact with other people and would thus endanger Martinson's health. Furthermore, the Vocational Expert's opinion does not take into account Dr. Fairfax's opinion that Martinson should not work. Nor does it adequately take into account the evidence in the record that Martinson's condition leaves her with an extremely low energy level. 13 Because the ALJ did not have clear and convincing reasons for rejecting Dr. Fairfax's opinion that Martinson was unable to work, we hold that the ALJ erred in disregarding it. 14