Court Opinion

ID: 9506075
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-06 20:40:35.623094+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:06:39.935433
License: Public Domain

JANE B. STRANCH,
dissenting.
My review of the record reveals that the ALJ failed to give proper consideration to the medical opinion evidence concerning Miller’s mental impairments. See Gayheart v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 710 F.3d 365, 374-76 (6th Cir.2013). First, the ALJ should not have discredited the opinions of Dr. Martin and Nurse Proehl on the basis that the opinions were inconsistent with their treatment notes because the notes thoroughly documented and supported their diagnoses of severe mental impairments. Further, the ALJ failed to set *195forth a sufficient basis for disregarding the testimony of Dr. Spring that Miller’s impairments met the requirements of two regulatory listings. Finally, the ALJ should not have relied on Dr. Pawlarczyk’s assessment of Miller’s mental limitations because Pawlarczyk merely adopted a pri- or functional assessment without considering any of the new medical evidence that Miller presented. Because the ALJ failed to give appropriate consideration to the medical opinion evidence, I would remand the case to the Social Security Administration for further consideration. Accordingly, I respectfully dissent from the majority’s opinion.