Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

Date: 12-02-2018

Case Style:

Devyn Ellen Applebee v. Nancy A. Berry Hill, Acting Commissioners, Social Security Administration

Case Number: 18-1520

Judge: Per Curiam

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit on appeal from the District of Maine (Penobscot County)

Plaintiff's Attorney: Riley L. Fenner

Defendant's Attorney: Halsey B. Frank, Michael J. Pelgro and Molly E. Cater

Description:





Appellant Devyn Ellen Applebee appeals from
a district court judgment affirming the Acting Commissioner of
Social Security's denial of her application for disability
benefits. An administrative law judge ("ALJ") found that, although
Applebee suffered from a variety of ailments, she retained
sufficient residual functional capacity to perform certain
sedentary work. Applebee contends that, in reaching that
conclusion, the ALJ erroneously assigned little or no weight to
Applebee's treating and examining sources and to Applebee's own
subjective testimony. After careful review, we affirm.
As we have stated repeatedly, the ALJ's findings shall
be conclusive if they are supported by substantial evidence, and
must be upheld "if a reasonable mind, reviewing the evidence in
the record as a whole, could accept it as adequate to support his
conclusion," even if the record could also justify a different
conclusion. Rodriguez v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 647 F.2d
218, 222-23 (1st Cir. 1981) (citations omitted). In applying the
"substantial evidence" standard, we bear in mind that it is the
province of the ALJ, not the courts, to find facts, decide issues
of credibility, draw inferences from the record, and resolve
conflicts of evidence. See Irlanda Ortiz v. Sec'y of Health &
Human Servs., 955 F.2d 765, 769 (1st Cir. 1991) (per curiam)
(citing Rodriguez, 647 F.2d at 222).
- 3 -
In a detailed and well-reasoned opinion, the ALJ
identified substantial evidence to support his assignment of
little or no weight to Applebee's treating and examining sources.
Specifically, the ALJ found that those sources were inconsistent
with the bulk of Applebee's medical record, including extensive
physical and mental examination notes, laboratory and diagnostic
testing results, and with the opinions of three state agency
experts. Moreover, the ALJ permissibly discounted Applebee's
credibility in light of her previous failure to attend a disability
claims hearing, failure to follow a prescribed course of treatment,
infrequency of treatment, and paucity of mental health treatment
records.
While the record arguably could support a different
conclusion, there is clearly substantial evidence to support the
ALJ's findings. Accordingly, we uphold the ALJ's decision. See
Rodriguez Pagan v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 819 F.2d 1, 3
(1st Cir. 1987) (per curiam).

Outcome: Affirmed.

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments:



Find a Lawyer

Subject:
City:
State:
 

Find a Case

Subject:
County:
State: