Nelson v. Apfel

210 F.3d 799 (7th Cir. Apr. 27, 2000) ; Clearinghouse Number: 53056

Description

Remand for Clarification of the Record in Disability Determination Is Proper When Experts’ Testimony Conflicts

Abstract

The Seventh Circuit held that the district court did not abuse its discretion by remanding this case to the administrative law judge to resolve factual conflicts in the record. Based on heart disease, leg pains, shortness of breath, and depression, plaintiff applied for social security disability and Supplemental Security Income benefits. Her application was denied, and the administrative law judge concluded that she was not disabled. The district court found a conflict between the testimony of the psychiatrist and the vocational expert and remanded the case. Appealing that decision, plaintiff argued that the record supported only a finding of disability. The Seventh Circuit held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in finding that the psychiatrist’s and vocational expert’s testimony supported both the conclusion that plaintiff suffered and the conclusion that she did not suffer from a severe impairment. The psychiatrist testified that plaintiff’s depression was not severe because it did not affect her ability to work but also rated her degree of functional loss as “often” in the area of concentration, persistence, or pace. That, according to the vocational expert, would preclude plaintiff from substantial gainful activity and thus qualify her depression as a severe impairment. The Seventh Circuit concluded that the psychiatrist’s meaning of “often” conflicted with that of the vocational expert.

Additional Information

Docket Date
2000-04-27 00:00:00+00:00

Files

Filed under: