Sandgathe v. Chater

No. 94-35757 (9th Cir. Mar. 13, 1997). ; Clearinghouse Number: 52221

Description

ALJ’s Rejection of Treating Physician’s Opinion Was Supported by Substantial Evidence

Abstract

The Ninth Circuit has affirmed the Social Security Administration’s decision to deny plaintiff claimant’s application for disability benefits. The administrative law judge (ALJ) concluded that plaintiff is not disabled because he can perform light and sedentary work. On appeal, plaintiff argued that that ALJ improperly rejected the opinion of his treating physician in favor of a medical consultant’s opinion. The ALJ found that plaintiff’s treating physician’s report rested on plaintiff’s self-reporting of the extent of his physical ailments, which the ALJ found exaggerated. Thus, the ALJ concluded that the consultant’s testimony was more reliable. The court of appeals held that the ALJ may reject controverted testimony of a treating physician if the ALJ has specific and legitimate reasons supported by substantial evidence. Finding that the ALJ’s reliance on the consultant’s opinion was based on substantial evidence, the court affirmed the decision denying benefits.

Additional Information

Docket Date
1997-03-13 00:00:00+00:00

Files

Filed under: