Blacha v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
| Decision Date | 31 August 1990 |
| Docket Number | No. 89-2290,89-2290 |
| Citation | 927 F.2d 228 |
| Parties | , Unempl.Ins.Rep. CCH 15926A Edward L. BLACHA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Defendant-Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit |
Ronald D. Honig, Weisberg & Walkon, Southfield, Mich., for plaintiff-appellant.
Donna Morros Weinstein, Chief Counsel, Ayrie Moore, Robert Hanson, Dept. of Health and Human Services, Office of the Gen. Counsel, Region V, Chicago, Ill., Karl R. Overman, Asst. U.S. Atty., Office of the U.S. Atty., Detroit, Mich., for defendant-appellee.
Before MERRITT, Chief Judge, and MARTIN and NELSON, Circuit Judges.
This is an appeal from a district court decision granting summary judgment to the Secretary of Health and Human Services in a social security disability case. For the reasons that follow, we shall affirm the judgment of the district court.
The claimant, Edward L. Blacha, worked for General Motors as a senior graphic engineer. The job was sedentary in nature, involving only light lifting. Mr. Blacha was injured in 1978, when his chair collapsed and he fell backwards. Although he continued working for two years, he has allegedly suffered from pinched nerves in the neck, severe headaches, occasional loss of feeling in the arms and hands, and low back pain.
Since June of 1981, Mr. Blacha has filed three applications for disability benefits. All were denied, and neither of the first two was pursued beyond the administrative level. This dispute centers on Mr. Blacha's third application, filed on July 18, 1987.
A hearing on the third application was held before an administrative law judge on March 3, 1988. Because the issue of the claimant's disability between January 20, 1981 and March 28, 1983, had been decided against him when the second application for benefits was denied on the latter date, the ALJ disposed of that portion of the claim on res judicata grounds. As to the claim for benefits with respect to the period after March 28, 1983, the ALJ found that: (1) Mr. Blacha had insured status up to and including December 31, 1986, but not thereafter; (2) the evidence established that Mr. Blacha did not meet any of the "listings" in 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1; (3) Mr. Blacha had the residual functional capacity to perform work-related activities, except for work involving prolonged standing and walking, repetitive climbing of stairs or ladders, lifting, or work which would require standing and walking for more than 45 minutes at a time or sitting for over an hour at a time. On the basis of these findings, the ALJ concluded that Mr. Blacha was not disabled within the meaning of the statute. The Appeals Council denied a request for review, and this lawsuit followed.
The matter was referred to Magistrate Marcia G. Cooke, who recommended that summary judgment be entered in favor of the Secretary. Mr. Blacha filed objections to the magistrate's report, and the district court subsequently issued an opinion and order concluding that the Secretary was entitled to summary judgment. Mr. Blacha appealed. The principal issues on appeal are whether substantial evidence supports the decision of the Secretary and whether the Secretary erred in refusing to reopen the second claim for benefits.
We agree with the magistrate's conclusion that Mr. Blacha's disability did not come within the listing's definition of a disorder of the spine, 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1, Sec. 1.05:
Neither did Mr. Blacha's subjective complaints of pain pass muster under 42 U.S.C. Sec. 423(d)(5)(A), which provides that:
"An individual's statement as to pain or other symptoms shall not alone be conclusive evidence of disability as defined in this section; there must be medical signs and findings, established by medically acceptable clinical or laboratory diagnostic techniques, which show the existence of a medical impairment that results from anatomical, physiological, or psychological abnormalities which could reasonably be expected to produce the pain...."
This statute, we have said, calls upon us to make the following analysis:
Duncan v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 801 F.2d 847, 853 (6th Cir.1986).
The ALJ did find objective medical evidence of an underlying condition: nerve root compression in the cervical spine due to a herniated disc, as well as degenerative changes in the cervical spine. But there is little or no objective medical evidence tending to confirm that the pain attributed to this condition is disabling.
As the magistrate noted at pp. 6-7 of her report, "[t]here are no x-rays, EMGs or other relevant evidence to support [the treating physician's finding of disability] contained in the record after March 28, 1983, the last date the [appellant] was found disabled."
Without detailed corroborating medical evidence, this court will generally defer to the ALJ's assessment. Houston v. Secretary of Health and Human Services 36 F.2d 365, 367 (6th Cir.1984); see also Duncan, 801 F.2d at 852. Three reasons support such deference here.
First, the ALJ had an adequate basis to conclude that Mr. Blacha's objectively established medical condition was not so severe that it could reasonably be expected to produce disabling pain. Only mild osteoarthritic changes were disclosed between 1981 and 1983, with only "marginal lipping and spur...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lee v. Colvin
...20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c)(3)(i), 416.929(c)(3)(i); Bogle v. Sullivan, 998 F.2d 342, 348 (6th Cir. 1993); Blacha v. Secretary of Health and Human Serv's., 927 F.2d 228, 231 (6th Cir. 1990). Plaintiff's daily activities include helping to tend for a 21 month old infant, taking care of his own ......
-
Gordon v. Berryhill, CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:18 CV-00055-HBB
...20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c)(3)(i), 416.929(c)(3)(i); Bogle v. Sullivan, 998 F.2d 342, 348 (6th Cir. 1993); Blacha v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 927 F.2d 228, 231 (6th Cir. 1990) The ALJ also considered whether there were any inconsistencies between Plaintiff's subjective statements and th......
-
Betts v. Berryhill
...supported by evidence in the record, it need not reflect unsubstantiated allegations by the claimant. See Blacha v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 927 F.2d 228, 231 (6th Cir. 1990). In fashioning a hypothetical question to be posed to a VE, the ALJ is required to incorporate only those lim......
-
Cooney v. Colvin, CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:14CV-00059-HBB
...20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c)(3)(i), 416.929(c)(3)(i); Bogle v. Sullivan, 998 F.2d 342, 348 (6th Cir. 1993); Blacha v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 927 F.2d 228, 231 (6th Cir. 1990). Additionally, the ALJ considered the frequency that Plaintiff sought treatment for the allegedly disabling con......
-
Assessment of disability issues
...(E.D. Mich. 2001), citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) (ALJ can consider medication to assess pain severity); Blacha v. Sec. of HHS , 927 F.2d 228, 231 (6 th Cir. 1990) ( citing Kimbrough v. Sec. of HHS , 801 F.2d 794, 797 (6 th Cir. 1986)). d. Seventh Circuit (1) The Seventh Circuit in G......
-
Table of Cases
...F.2d 293, 296 (11th Cir. 1987), § 509.2 Bjornson v. Astrue , 671 F.3d 640 (7th Cir. Jan. 31, 2012), 7th-12, 7th-13 Blacha v. Sec. of HHS , 927 F.2d 228, 231 (6th Cir. 1990), §§ 205.8, 205.9, 1205 Blacknall v. Heckler , 721 F.2d 1179, 1181 (9th Cir. 1983), 2d-10 Black v. Apfel , 143 F.3d 383......
-
Table of cases
...F.2d 293, 296 (11th Cir. 1987), § 509.2 Bjornson v. Astrue , 671 F.3d 640 (7th Cir. Jan. 31, 2012), 7th-12, 7th-13 Blacha v. Sec. of HHS , 927 F.2d 228, 231 (6th Cir. 1990), §§ 205.8, 205.9, 1205 Blacknall v. Heckler , 721 F.2d 1179, 1181 (9th Cir. 1983), 2d-10 Black v. Apfel , 143 F.3d 383......