Cole v. Harris, 80-1362
Decision Date | 06 March 1981 |
Docket Number | No. 80-1362,80-1362 |
Citation | 641 F.2d 613 |
Parties | Charles K. COLE, Appellant, v. Patricia R. HARRIS, Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, Appellee. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit |
Charles K. Cole, pro se.
Robert D. Kingsland, U. S. Atty., St. Louis, Mo., Bruce D. White, Asst. U. S. Atty., St. Louis, Mo., for appellee.
Before LAY, Chief Judge, GIBSON, Senior Circuit Judge, and HEANEY, Circuit Judge.
Cole, a forty-five-year-old man with an eighth grade education, was injured on August 9, 1974, while employed as a truck driver for the Bekins Moving Company. He applied for Social Security disability benefits on January 30, 1975. The Secretary ultimately denied benefits and Cole failed to take a timely appeal from the denial.
Cole filed a second application for benefits on February 1, 1978. This application was ultimately denied on February 5, 1979. Cole appealed to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. That court granted the Secretary's motion for summary judgment and Cole appeals to this Court. We reverse and remand to the Secretary for further evidentiary hearings.
The remand is required for the following reasons:
1. It is conceded that Cole cannot return to his previous jobs as a truck driver or an assembler of heavy automotive parts. In such circumstances, the burden shifts to the Secretary to show that Cole could perform other work. Voyles v. Harris, 636 F.2d 228, 229 (8th Cir. 1980); Rhines v. Harris, 634 F.2d 1076, 1078-1079 (8th Cir. 1980); Wroblewski v. Califano, 609 F.2d 908, 912 (8th Cir. 1979). To meet this burden, the Secretary must produce evidence showing that there are jobs available that realistically suit the claimant's qualifications and mental and physical capabilities. E. g., Voyles v. Harris, supra, at 229; Rhines v. Harris, supra, 634 F.2d at 1079; Young v. Califano, 633 F.2d 469, 472 (6th Cir. 1980). Adequate proof cannot be based on mere theoretical ability to perform some kind of work. Rhines v. Harris, supra, 634 F.2d at 1079. The record is silent as to whether the Secretary recognized the fact that the burden had shifted and we cannot say from the record that the burden had been satisfied.
The vocational expert's testimony that Cole could perform work as an assembler, an inspector, or a packager is divorced from the reality of this particular claimant's case. It appears that the expert may have reached his conclusion because of his misunderstanding of the apparent functional origin of Cole's subjective complaints, his unfamiliarity with the claimant's particular performance skills, see Brinker v. Weinberger, 522 F.2d 13, 18 (8th Cir. 1975), and the absence of any express references to pain in the ALJ's hypothetical question. Although the expert noted that persons with similar restrictions had been placed in the types of employment he described, the focus must be on the individual claimant since different people can react in markedly different ways to the same impairments. See Landess v. Weinberger, 490 F.2d 1187, 1190 (8th Cir. 1974). In this case, there is uncontradicted medical evidence of the claimant's history of neck and back problems with a functional origin. In addition, Cole testified about the severe restrictions on his daily activities and his constant pain and discomfort. In addressing the question of whether the claimant could realistically perform in existing employment in Rhines v. Harris, supra, 634 F.2d at 1079, this Court stated, (quoting Thomas v. Celebrezze, 331 F.2d 541, 546 (4th Cir. 1964). If the vocational expert were to consider the appropriate information, he may well conclude that the same is true of Mr. Cole.
2. It appears that the ALJ believed that Cole's complaints of pain and limited mobility and dexterity were "extremely exaggerated," because there was a dearth of objective medical facts to support them. By placing emphasis on objective medical facts, the ALJ concluded that the claimant was "in a certain amount of discomfort and pain" but that it was not disabling.
The ALJ erred in emphasizing the need for objective medical evidence. As this Court said in Northcutt v. Califano, 581 F.2d 164, 166 (8th Cir. 1978) (citations...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Cornella v. Schweiker, 83-1209
... ... Page 984 ... Cole v. Harris, 641 F.2d 613, 614 (8th Cir.1981); Simonson v. Schweiker, 699 F.2d 426, 428 (8th ... ...
-
Branson v. Callahan
...claimant to produce objective evidence to corroborate allegations of disabling pain. McDonald, 698 F.2d at 365; Cole v. Harris, 641 F.2d 613, 615-16 (8th Cir.1981); v. Secretary of Health, Ed. and Welfare, 623 F.2d 523, 525 (8th Cir.1980); Northcutt v. Califano, 581 F.2d 164, 166 (8th Cir.1......
-
Hogan v. Schweiker, Civ. A. No. 81-K-1692.
...to recognize that people with similar characteristics can react in markedly different ways to the same impairments. Cole v. Harris, 641 F.2d 613, 615-16 (8th Cir. 1981); Mode v. Celebreeze supra at 136-37; Allen v. Schweiker, Slip Opinion. No. C-81-1210 SC (N.D.Cal., Sept. 10, 1981); Pitcoc......
-
Barnes v. Schweiker, C 82-72.
...ALJ is bound to consider all factors in the record which shed light on the validity or invalidity of plaintiff's claim. Cole v. Harris, 641 F.2d 613 (8th Cir.1981); Landess v. Weinberger, 490 F.2d 1187 (8th Cir.1974). Further, each plaintiff must be treated individually and an individualize......
-
Case survey
...SOCIAL SECURITY ISSUES ANNOTATED 1101 (N.D. Iowa 1998), citing McDonald v. Schweiker , 698 F.2d 361, 365 (8th Cir. 1983); Cole v. Harris , 641 F.2d 613, 615-16 (8th Cir. 1981); Brand v. Sec’y of Health, Ed., and Welfare , 623 F.2d 523, 525 (8th Cir. 1980); Northcutt v. Califano , 581 F.2d 1......
-
Table of Cases
...(D. Kan. Nov. 26, 2003), § 1207.1 Cole v. Callahan , 970 F. Supp. 708, 710 (S.D. Iowa 1997), §§ 312.9, 312.12, 1312.9 Cole v. Harris , 641 F.2d 613, 615-16 (8th Cir. 1981), § 203.11 Collado v. Apfel , 63 F. Supp.2d 152 (D.P.R. Aug. 5, 1999), §§ 107.16, 205.10, 503.2, 504.1 Collier v. Apfel,......
-
Assessment of disability issues
..., 14 F. Supp.2d 1089, 1096-97, 1101 (N.D. Iowa 1998), citing McDonald v. Schweiker , 698 F.2d 361, 365 (8 th Cir. 1983); Cole v. Harris , 641 F.2d 613, 615-16 (8 th Cir. 1981); Brand v. Sec’y of Health, Ed., and Welfare , 623 F.2d 523, 525 (8 th Cir. 1980); Northcutt v. Califano , 581 F.2d ......
-
Table of cases
...(D. Kan. Nov. 26, 2003), § 1207.1 Cole v. Callahan , 970 F. Supp. 708, 710 (S.D. Iowa 1997), §§ 312.9, 312.12, 1312.9 Cole v. Harris , 641 F.2d 613, 615-16 (8th Cir. 1981), § 203.11 Collado v. Apfel , 63 F. Supp.2d 152 (D.P.R. Aug. 5, 1999), §§ 107.16, 205.10, 503.2, 504.1 Collier v. Apfel,......