Alverio v. Chater
| Decision Date | 15 September 1995 |
| Docket Number | No. C 94-3002.,C 94-3002. |
| Citation | 902 F. Supp. 909 |
| Parties | Yvonne B. ALVERIO, Plaintiff, v. Shirley S. CHATER, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Northern District of Iowa |
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
Ronald J. Wagenaar of Legal Services Corporation of Iowa, Mason City, Iowa, for Plaintiff.
Ana M. Martel of the United States Attorney's Office, Northern District of Iowa, Cedar Rapids, Iowa, for Defendant.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION ............................................................... 913
A. Procedural Background ................................................... 913
B. Factual Background ...................................................... 913
C. The Court's Jurisdictional Basis ........................................ 919
II. ANALYSIS ................................................................... 921
A. The "Substantial Evidence" Standard ..................................... 921
B. The Polaski Standard and Subjective Pain Credibility Determinations ..... 922
C. Relative Burdens of Proof ............................................... 922
1. The ALJ's analysis of physicians' opinions ........................... 923
2. The ALJ's analysis of Alverio's subjective pain complaints ........... 926
a. Alleged inconsistencies regarding Alverio's daily activities ...... 926
b. Alleged inconsistencies regarding Alverio's medical treatment ..... 927
c. Alleged inconsistencies regarding Alverio's work history .......... 928
3. The credibility of Joey Van Zomeran .................................. 928
4. The hypothetical questions ........................................... 929
D. Relief .................................................................. 930
III. CONCLUSION ................................................................. 930
This social security disability case requires the court to probe the employment capabilities of a person suffering from an unusual mental impairment, which displays, as its primary characteristic, the excessive dramatization of one's physical ailments. The mental impairment is histrionic personality disorder. In addition, the plaintiff has alleged a multitude of somatic complaints to accompany her mental deficiencies, based on a somewhat convoluted medical history with several different physicians. However, her mental impairment is her primary problem, and the court is faced with the arduous task of examining the voluminous record and ultimately uncovering the magnitude of plaintiff's mental deficiencies in order to discover if the administrative law judge's decision to deny this plaintiff social security disability benefits was, in fact, a decision supported by substantial evidence.
Plaintiff has appealed the administrative law judge's decision denying plaintiff social security disability benefits. The issue before the court is whether the final decision of the Secretary is supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole. Specifically, the plaintiff alleges she has impairments which preclude her from performing her past relevant work or any other work that exists in significant numbers in the national economy. On the other hand, defendant argues that the Secretary has met her burden of showing the existence of jobs in the national economy which plaintiff could perform.
Alverio filed an application for social security disability benefits on October 1, 1991. (Tr. 14.). Her application was denied initially on December 26, 1991, and after reconsideration on May 6, 1992. An administrative hearing was held concerning this matter on December 10, 1992, after which the ALJ determined Alverio was not disabled and not entitled to social security disability benefits on June 24, 1993. (Tr. 14.). On August 16, 1993, Alverio requested review of the ALJ's decision from the Social Security Administration Appeals Council. (Tr. 9.). On November 27, 1993, the Appeals Council denied Alverio's request and stated that "the ALJ's decision stands as the final decision of the Secretary in your case." (Tr. 5.). Because the Appeals Council's November 23, 1993 letter denying Alverio's request represented the final determination of the Secretary, and because Alverio filed this action on January 20, 1994, there is no dispute that Alverio's complaint was timely filed with this court. Therefore, Alverio is entitled to a review of her case under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). The court turns next to the factual background of Alverio's case.
The plaintiff in this case is Yvonne Alverio, a 49-year-old woman from Mason City, Iowa, who is five feet, five inches tall and who weighs approximately 145 pounds. Alverio is right-handed and has completed twelve grades of school, including one year spent in some type of special education class. Although Alverio did receive a high school education, a pre-employment test conducted at a small college revealed Alverio had the mental capabilities of a fourth grader. (Tr. 39.). In addition, Alverio has difficulty with reading comprehension, memory recall, and concentration on any task in general. (Tr. 39-41.).
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 657-58 (4th ed. 1994). In addition, Dr. Courtney noted Alverio has difficulty concentrating and utilizing judgment and rapidly loses what abilities she has when pressured or under stress. (Tr. 180.). Furthermore, he also recognized that Alverio has difficulty working with others in stressful situations. (Tr. 180.).
In February 1991, Alverio saw Dr. Robert Johannsen, a family practitioner, for treatment of diabetes and depression. (Tr. 177.). Johannsen recommended a diet to control her sugar intake and visits to the Mental Health Center to treat her depression. (Tr. 177.). However, Alverio missed her appointments at the Mental Health Center. In addition, she maintained poor control over her diabetes, although she did take one tablet of medicine a day, later escalating to two tablets a day. In March 1991, Alverio again saw Dr. Johannsen, complaining of problems with her nerves, inability to sleep, and depression. (Tr. 177.). Dr. Johannsen prescribed antidepressants and recommended that Alverio see a psychiatrist. On April 8, 1991, Alverio saw Dr. Johannsen because of back pain and depression. (Tr. 176.). Johannsen prescribed no lifting for two weeks and increased her dosage of antidepressants. On April 22, 1991, Alverio saw Dr. Johannsen, claiming a domestic assault occurring on April 21, 1991 aggravated her prior back pain. (Tr. 176.). Dr. Johannsen diagnosed her injury as a soft tissue injury to the neck, relegating her to lifting no more than twenty pounds, but determining it was not necessary at that time to prohibit her from working. In addition, Johannsen ordered x-rays of Alverio's back, and radiologist Schularick diagnosed Alverio as having scoliosis, which is defined as an abnormal lateral curvature of the vertebral column. (Tr. 179.). On May 1, 1991, Dr. Johannsen treated Alverio once again for a neck spasm and arranged for her to wear a soft cervical collar with a splint. (Tr. 176.).
On October 30, 1991, Alverio saw Dr. Mahoney, a family practitioner, for musculoskeletal pain in her neck and back, right leg, and right arm. (Tr. 184-85.). She also complained she was having problems due to standing at work. Dr. Mahoney prescribed Motrin for her and diagnosed her as histrionic. (Tr. 184-85.). Dr. Mahoney commented at this time that he believed she was trying to get out of a difficult job situation and did not like the nature of her work. Also, he felt she just needed a doctor's excuse to obtain unemployment benefits. However, on March 25, 1992, when the Disability Determinative Services Bureau asked him for a professional opinion regarding Alverio's condition, Dr. Mahoney declined to give a professional opinion regarding Alverio's mental problems, claiming at that point he had no "detailed information that would be helpful for the report." (Tr. 196.). Later in November 1992, Dr. Mahoney reiterated that Alverio is histrionic, "which means that she is going to have multiple somatic complaints which are often very difficult to sort out." (Tr. 260....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lauriano v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.
...hypothetical question, it "does not constitute substantial evidence to support a finding of no disability." Alverio v. Chater, 902 F.Supp. 909, 929 (N.D. Iowa 1995) (quoting Chamberlain v. Shalala, 47 F.3d 1489, 1495 (8th Cir. 1995)). In order for the ALJ to rely on the VE's testimony, the ......
-
Vallez v. Astrue
...of unemployment benefits is erroneous. Roberts v. Callahan, 971 F. Supp. 498, 501-02 (D.N.M. 1997); see also Alverio v. Chater, 902 F. Supp. 909, 928 (N.D. Iowa 1995) (receipt of unemployment benefits by a claimant does not necessarily indicate a lack of credibility); Riley v. Heckler, 585 ......
-
Galindo v. Soc. Sec. Admin. Carolyn W. Colvin
...51-1-5(A)(3). Although Galindo is correct that this fact is not by itself conclusive as to credibility, see, e.g., Alverio v. Chater, 902 F. Supp. 909, 928 (N.D. Iowa 1995), the ALJ did not err simply by considering the matter as one element of substantial evidence supporting his credibilit......
-
Roberts v. Callahan, Civ. No. 96-858 JP/LCS.
...Tr. 297-97. Receipt of unemployment benefits, however, does not mean that a claimant is able to work. See, e.g., Alverio v. Chater, 902 F.Supp. 909, 928 (N.D.Iowa 1995); Riley v. Heckler, 585 F.Supp. 278, 285 (S.D.Ohio 1984). A desire to work likewise does not mean that a claimant can actua......
-
Initial Client Contact
...as follows: Receipt of unemployment benefits, however, does not mean that a claimant is able to work. See, e.g., Alverio v. Chater, 902 F. Supp. 909, 928 (N.D. Iowa 1995); Riley v. Heckler , 585 F. Supp. 278, 285 (S.D. Ohio 1984). A desire to work likewise does not mean that a claimant can ......
-
Table of Cases
...v. Bowen , 704 F. Supp. 49, 54 (S.D.N.Y. 1989), §§ 107.12, 107.16, 202.3, 202.9, 203.2, 204.8, 316.4, 509.3, 1210.5 Alverio v. Chater , 902 F. Supp. 909, 930-31 (N.D. Iowa 1995), § 607.3 Alves v. Apfel , 18 F. Supp.2d 935 (N.D. Ill. 1998), §§ 102.1, 102.3 Alyeska Pipeline Service Co. v. Wil......
-
Federal court issues
...impairments, and that the VE testified that such limitation alone would preclude unskilled employment. Id. See also Alverio v. Chater , 902 F. Supp. 909, 930-31 (N.D. Iowa 1995) (remanding with instructions to pay benefits since substantial evidence did not support a finding of no disabilit......
-
Initial Client Contact
...as follows: Receipt of unemployment benefits, however, does not mean that a claimant is able to work. See, e.g., Alverio v. Chater, 902 F. Supp. 909, 928 (N.D. Iowa 1995); Riley v. Heckler , 585 F. Supp. 278, 285 (S.D. Ohio 1984). A desire to work likewise does not mean that a claimant can ......