Bland v. Bowen
| Decision Date | 23 November 1988 |
| Docket Number | No. 88-1272,88-1272 |
| Citation | 861 F.2d 533 |
| Parties | , Unempl.Ins.Rep. CCH 14287A Robert S. BLAND, Appellant, v. Otis R. BOWEN, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit |
Timothy C. Harlan, Columbia, Mo., for appellant.
Henry J. Fredericks, Asst. U.S. Atty., St. Louis, Mo., for appellee.
Before WOLLMAN and BEAM, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD R. GIBSON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Robert Bland appeals from the order of the district court 1 affirming the decision of the Secretary denying his claim for disability benefits. For reversal, Bland argues that the denial of benefits was not supported by substantial evidence. For the reasons discussed below, we affirm.
Bland filed applications for disability and supplemental security income in April 1983 alleging a disabling heart condition which began on January 30, 1983. The Social Security Administration (SSA) denied Bland's applications initially and on reconsideration. At Bland's request, a hearing was held before an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ). The ALJ determined that Bland was not disabled and Bland sought judicial review in United States District Court. The district court 2 remanded the case to the Secretary for further administrative action. On remand the Secretary was instructed to call a vocational expert to testify as to the availability of work that Bland was capable of performing. The vocational expert was to consider Bland's exertional and nonexertional limitations, as well as the combination of these impairments.
Pursuant to the remand order a supplemental hearing was held on June 6, 1986. After the supplemental hearing the ALJ determined that Bland was not under a "disability" as defined in the Social Security Act. The Appeals Council adopted the ALJ's conclusions and the ALJ's recommended decision stands as the final decision of the Secretary. Bland again sought judicial review of the Secretary's decision denying benefits. The case was referred to a magistrate 3 who recommended that the Secretary's decision be affirmed. The district court adopted the magistrate's recommended decision and entered judgment in favor of the Secretary.
Bland is 46 years old and at the initial administrative hearing he testified that he finished the ninth grade and subsequently obtained a GED. Bland's past work included work as a plumber's helper, maintenance man, assembly line worker, animal warden dispatcher, crane operator, and bartender. Bland last worked as an attendant at a state psychiatric hospital, but he has not worked since January 30, 1983. On January 30, 1983, Bland was hospitalized for a myocardial infarction and was discharged from the hospital on February 12. Since this hospitalization Bland has been examined on numerous occasions and has regularly visited hospital emergency rooms with complaints of chest pain. The ensuing examinations have all revealed Bland's preexisting myocardial infarction but no new conditions have been detected. Bland's heart condition is controlled with medication.
Almost three years after filing for social security benefits Bland's attorney arranged for Bland to be examined by a psychologist. The psychologist, Wiley Miller, M.Ed., administered the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) to Bland and diagnosed generalized anxiety disorder and dysthymic disorder (neurotic depression). Thereafter, Bland was evaluated by two additional psychologists and a psychiatrist and all of the examinations revealed that Bland was suffering from a combination of anxiety and generalized depression.
Bland testified at the first administrative hearing. In his testimony Bland indicated that he was able to walk one-half mile before experiencing any pain or shortness of breath, he had no difficulty using his arms and hands, and he was able to lift up to twenty pounds. He also indicated that he was able to bend but had problems squatting. Bland testified that he lived with his five children and he did most of the cooking and general housecleaning. He was able to drive short distances and went grocery shopping about every other day; he also picked his children up after school. This testimony was generally restated at the supplemental hearing.
At the supplemental hearing a vocational expert testified and was asked a series of hypothetical questions by the ALJ. The hypothetical questions embodied Bland's various exertional and nonexertional limitations. Based on these questions, the vocational expert identified several jobs available in significant numbers which Bland could perform. The jobs were generally semi-skilled and included, work as a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Englerth v. Colvin
...v. Barnhart, 294 F.3d 1019, 1022 (8th Cir. 2002). See also Cox v. Astrue, 495 F.3d 614, 617 (8th Cir. 2007). In Bland v. Bowen, 861 F.2d 533, 535 (8th Cir. 1988), the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals held:The concept of substantial evidence is something less than the weight of the evidence a......
-
Johnston v. Colvin
...v. Barnhart,294 F.3d 1019, 1022 (8th Cir. 2002). See also Cox v. Astrue, 495 F.3d 614, 617 (8th Cir. 2007). In Bland v. Bowen, 861 F.2d 533, 535 (8th Cir. 1988), the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals held:The concept of substantial evidence is something less than the weight of the evidence an......
-
Frieden v. Colvin
...v. Barnhart, 294 F.3d 1019, 1022 (8th Cir. 2002). See also Cox v. Astrue, 495 F.3d 614, 617 (8th Cir. 2007). In Bland v.Bowen, 861 F.2d 533, 535 (8th Cir. 1988), the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals held:The concept of substantial evidence is something less than the weight of the evidence an......
-
Stephens v. Astrue
...v. Barnhart, 294 F.3d 1019, 1022 (8th Cir. 2002). See also Cox v. Astrue, 495 F.3d 614, 617 (8th Cir. 2007). In Bland v. Bowen, 861 F.2d 533, 535 (8th Cir. 1988), the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals held:[t]he concept of substantial evidence is something less than the weight of the evidence......
-
Case survey
...at 1030, quoting Bentley v. § 203.3 SOCIAL SECURITY ISSUES ANNOTATED Shalala , 52 F.3d 784, 787 (8th Cir. 1995) ( citing Bland v. Bowen , 861 F.2d 533, 535 (8th Cir. 1988); Fulton v. Heckler , 760 F.2d 1052, 1056 (10th Cir. 1985); and Richardson v. Perales , 402 U.S. 389, 402-03, 91 S.Ct. 1......
-
Table of Cases
..., 582 F.3d 647 (6th Cir. Sept. 24, 2009), 6th-09 Blandford v. Apfel , 69 F. Supp.2d 353, 359 (N.D.N.Y. 1999), § 313.1 Bland v. Bowen , 861 F.2d 533, 535 (8th Cir. 1988), § 203.3 Blankenship v. Bowen , 874 F.2d 1116, 1122-24 (6th Cir. 1998), §§ 204.6, 209.3, 312.1, 1209.3 Blanton v. Chater, ......
-
Assessment of disability issues
...the medical record as a whole.’” Id. at 1030, quoting Bentley v. Shalala , 52 F.3d 784, 787 (8 th Cir. 1995) ( citing Bland v. Bowen , 861 F.2d 533, 535 (8 th Cir. 1988); Fulton v. Heckler , 760 F.2d 1052, 1056 (10 th Cir. 1985); and Richardson v. Perales , 402 U.S. 389, 402-03, 91 S.Ct. 14......
-
Table of cases
..., 582 F.3d 647 (6th Cir. Sept. 24, 2009), 6th-09 Blandford v. Apfel , 69 F. Supp.2d 353, 359 (N.D.N.Y. 1999), § 313.1 Bland v. Bowen , 861 F.2d 533, 535 (8th Cir. 1988), § 203.3 Blankenship v. Bowen , 874 F.2d 1116, 1122-24 (6th Cir. 1998), §§ 204.6, 209.3, 312.1, 1209.3 A-7 TABLE OF CASES ......