Opinion ID: 478406
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Appellant's Testimony Concerning His Use of Alcohol

Text: 14 The administrative law judge noted that appellant's testimony shows that he enjoys the use of alcohol, that it never has been a problem regarding holding a job and that he feels he could stop it if he wanted to. Citing Brown v. Heckler, 713 F.2d 441 (9th Cir.1983), appellant argues that it was reversible error for the administrative law judge to consider or rely upon, to any extent, appellant's own testimony concerning his use of alcohol. Brown, however, held only that a finding of nondisability could not be based solely on a claimant's declaration in written interrogatories that she was not disabled by alcoholism. The panel in Brown noted that the administrative law judge erred in not holding a hearing on the issue of the claimant's alcohol-related disability, concluding that the lack of a hearing denied the ALJ the opportunity to make credibility judgments regarding [claimant's] testimony. Brown, 713 F.2d at 443. 15 Far from prohibiting administrative law judges from considering testimony from claimants minimizing the effects of their alcohol intake on their job performance, Brown simply cautions that, because of alcoholics' propensity for downplaying the adverse effects of their drinking, such testimony should not be given undue weight in the face of medical evidence to the contrary. Therefore, while appellant's testimony downplaying his use of alcohol was not conclusive on the issue of the claimed alcohol-related disability, the administrative law judge did not error as a matter of law in considering appellant's testimony regarding his drinking habits.