Court Opinion

ID: 9916274
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-01-09 17:01:16.50028+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:24:56.064182
License: Public Domain

USCA11 Case: 22-12989    Document: 23-1     Date Filed: 01/09/2024   Page: 1 of 8

                                                  [DO NOT PUBLISH]
                                   In the
                United States Court of Appeals
                        For the Eleventh Circuit

                          ____________________

                                No. 22-12989
                          Non-Argument Calendar
                          ____________________

       KEVIN CARR,
                                                     Plaintiﬀ-Appellant,
       versus
       COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,

                                                   Defendant-Appellee.

                          ____________________

                 Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Middle District of Florida
                    D.C. Docket No. 5:21-cv-00056-PRL
                          ____________________
USCA11 Case: 22-12989      Document: 23-1      Date Filed: 01/09/2024     Page: 2 of 8

       2                      Opinion of the Court                  22-12989

       Before NEWSOM, GRANT, and ED CARNES, Circuit Judges.
       PER CURIAM:
              Kevin Carr appeals the district court’s order affirming the
       Social Security Administration Commissioner’s denial of his claim
       for disability and disability insurance benefits. Carr contends that
       the administrative law judge who evaluated his claim improperly
       disregarded his testimony about his symptoms.
                                I.     Background
              Carr applied for a period of disability and disability insurance
       benefits with the Social Security Administration, alleging that he
       had been disabled since January 1, 2019. The SSA denied the appli-
       cation initially and on reconsideration. Carr then requested a hear-
       ing before an ALJ.
              At the hearing Carr testified that he suffers from mental
       health issues and various physical impairments, including knee
       pain and degeneration, shoulder pain, back pain, migraines, and
       hearing loss. He also explained how those impairments have lim-
       ited his day-to-day activities. Carr is a stay-at-home father to his
       three children, who are twelve, thirteen, and fourteen years old.
       His responsibilities at home include helping his kids get ready for
       school; picking them up and dropping them off at school; helping
       his wife get ready for work and making her coffee in the morning;
       going grocery shopping; preparing sandwiches; folding laundry;
       and attending his children’s sporting events.
USCA11 Case: 22-12989      Document: 23-1     Date Filed: 01/09/2024     Page: 3 of 8

       22-12989               Opinion of the Court                         3

              After review of Carr’s medical evidence, the ALJ concluded
       that Carr suffered from the following severe impairments: degen-
       erative joint disease of the knees and right shoulder; mild right car-
       pal tunnel syndrome; degenerative disc disease of the lumbar spine;
       headaches; hearing loss; and bipolar disorder. But the ALJ ex-
       plained that although Carr’s “medically determinable impairments
       could reasonably be expected to cause the alleged symptoms,” his
       “statements concerning the intensity, persistence and limiting ef-
       fects of these symptoms are not entirely consistent with the medi-
       cal evidence and other evidence in the record for the reasons ex-
       plained in this decision.”
              The ALJ went on to list the medical records that supported
       her finding that Carr’s symptoms were not consistent with medical
       evidence, including details about x-rays, scans, and examinations of
       Carr’s right knee, right shoulder, spine, and right hand.
               The ALJ also explained that Carr’s description of his symp-
       toms is inconsistent with his account of his daily activities. The ALJ
       said that Carr’s ability to help with chores at home, take care of his
       children, and drive to the children’s school and the grocery store
       are not consistent with his claims that he is unable to work. The
       ALJ concluded that Carr could engage in sedentary work with spec-
       ified limitations and that there were jobs in the national economy
       that met his specific exertional standard, and thus he was not disa-
       bled.
             Carr appealed the ALJ’s denial of his application for disability
       and disability benefits to the Commissioner’s appeals council,
USCA11 Case: 22-12989      Document: 23-1      Date Filed: 01/09/2024     Page: 4 of 8

       4                      Opinion of the Court                  22-12989

       which denied his request for review. Carr then filed an action in
       district court alleging that the Commissioner improperly denied
       him benefits under the Social Security Act. The district court en-
       tered an order and judgment affirming the Commissioner’s deci-
       sion.
                                II.    Discussion
              We review the Commissioner’s final decision, which here is
       the ALJ’s decision because the ALJ denied benefits and the appeals
       council denied review. Viverette v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 13 F.4th 1309,
       1313 (11th Cir. 2021). We review de novo the ALJ’s application of
       legal principles but review the resulting decision “only to deter-
       mine if it is supported by substantial evidence.” Pupo v. Comm’r,
       Soc. Sec. Admin., 17 F.4th 1054, 1060 (11th Cir. 2021). Substantial
       evidence supports the ALJ’s denial of disability when there is
       enough relevant evidence from which a reasonable person could
       “accept as adequate to support a conclusion.” Viverette, 13 F.4th at
       1314. There must be “more than a scintilla” of evidence supporting
       the ALJ’s decision, but there can be “less than a preponderance.”
       Id. In determining whether substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s
       decision, we may not “decid[e] the facts anew, mak[e] credibility
       determinations, or re-weigh[] the evidence.” Moore v. Barnhart, 405
       F.3d 1208, 1211 (11th Cir. 2005).
              In his brief to this Court, Carr has challenged the ALJ’s deci-
       sion based only on his alleged knee, spine, shoulder, and hand im-
       pairments, and as a result, challenges based on any other impair-
       ments have been forfeited. See Sapuppo v. Allstate Floridian Ins. Co.,
USCA11 Case: 22-12989      Document: 23-1      Date Filed: 01/09/2024     Page: 5 of 8

       22-12989               Opinion of the Court                          5

       739 F.3d 678, 681 (11th Cir. 2014). Carr contends that the ALJ did
       not adequately explain her finding that his testimony about his
       symptoms was inconsistent with the medical evidence and the
       daily activities he was able to perform.
              When a disability claimant attempts to establish disability
       through testimony about subjective symptoms, he must provide
       evidence of a medical condition and either (1) objective medical
       evidence confirming the severity of the alleged symptoms; or
       (2) “that the objectively determined medical condition is of such a
       severity that it can be reasonably expected to give rise to the alleged
       pain.” Dyer v. Barnhart, 395 F.3d 1206, 1210 (11th Cir. 2005) (quo-
       tation marks omitted). If the ALJ finds that a claimant’s testimony
       about his symptoms lacks credibility, she must “articulate explicit
       and adequate reasons for discrediting the claimant’s” testimony,
       although she doesn’t have to do that using “particular phrases or
       formulations.” Id. (quotation marks omitted).
               Carr contends that the ALJ did not articulate explicit reasons
       why she found his testimony about his symptoms to be incon-
       sistent with his medical records. He argues that the ALJ’s decision
       only “summarized the treatment notes in the record” and failed to
       explain how the treatment notes contradicted his testimony about
       his pain. Carr asserts that the treatment notes cited by the ALJ ac-
       tually support his testimony about his symptoms because the notes
       acknowledge he walked with an antalgic gait, had tenderness in his
       right knee, and had cartilage defects in his right knee. Finally, Carr
       points to other medical evidence in the record that he claims
USCA11 Case: 22-12989      Document: 23-1       Date Filed: 01/09/2024     Page: 6 of 8

       6                       Opinion of the Court                  22-12989

       bolsters his testimony that he suffered severe pain due to his im-
       pairments.
               The ALJ adequately explained why she concluded that
       Carr’s testimony about his symptoms was not entirely consistent
       with the evidence in the record. She explained that after reviewing
       all available medical evidence she found multiple records that did
       not support Carr’s assertion that he has not been able to work since
       his disability onset date, and she went on to list the findings in those
       records. She also pointed out that Carr’s “most recent examina-
       tions and imaging” of his knees, lumbar spine, right shoulder, and
       right hand did “not note any severe findings.”
               The ALJ further found that Carr’s “activities of daily living
       are not as limited as expected given his allegations” about his med-
       ical condition. The ALJ explained that Carr “testified that he cares
       for his three children while their mother worked, which can be
       quite demanding both physically and emotionally.” His testimony
       established that he was “responsible for feeding his children, help-
       ing them get ready for school, providing transportation, going to
       their sporting events, doing some household chores, and grocery
       shopping.” This testimony supports the ALJ’s determination that
       there was a mismatch between Carr’s testimony about his daily ac-
       tivities and his medical records because those activities are more
       extensive than one would expect from someone unable to work.
              Our role is to determine whether substantial evidence sup-
       ports the ALJ’s decision that Carr is able to work. See Pupo, 17 F.4th
       at 1060. The medical records that the ALJ relied on provide enough
USCA11 Case: 22-12989      Document: 23-1     Date Filed: 01/09/2024     Page: 7 of 8

       22-12989               Opinion of the Court                         7

       evidence to support the conclusion that Carr’s symptoms were not
       as severe as he alleged. By arguing that there was other evidence
       in the record that supported his alleged symptoms and that the ALJ
       improperly interpreted the evidence she cited, Carr asks us to re-
       weigh the evidence before the ALJ, which we cannot do. See Moore,
       405 F.3d at 1211.
               Carr also challenges the ALJ’s characterization of his daily
       activities as inconsistent with the limitations he allegedly faces due
       to his impairments. He argues that the ALJ’s description of his
       childcare responsibilities as “demanding” is incorrect because he
       testified that his children could “fend for themselves” in the morn-
       ing, and the only activities he admitted to doing for their care were
       taking them to school and going to their sporting events. Carr also
       objects to the ALJ’s statement that he testified to performing
       household chores based on his statements that he could fold laun-
       dry, make sandwiches, and drive a short distance to the grocery
       store. Carr asserts that those activities are too easy to support a
       finding that he is not disabled.
              Again, Carr is asking us to reweigh the evidence presented
       to the ALJ. See Moore, 405 F.3d at 1211. It was appropriate for the
       ALJ to consider Carr’s daily activities when determining the inten-
       sity and persistence of his symptoms.              See 20 C.F.R.
       § 404.1529(c)(3)(i). And the ALJ’s characterization of Carr’s testi-
       mony about his daily activities was supported by evidence in the
       record, even if Carr does not believe it is the most favorable char-
       acterization. Because there is substantial evidence from which the
USCA11 Case: 22-12989     Document: 23-1     Date Filed: 01/09/2024    Page: 8 of 8

       8                     Opinion of the Court                 22-12989

       ALJ could find that Carr’s daily activities were not consistent with
       his claimed symptoms, the ALJ did not err.
             AFFIRMED.