Cronkhite v. Sullivan, 90-5433
| Decision Date | 24 April 1991 |
| Docket Number | No. 90-5433,90-5433 |
| Citation | 935 F.2d 133 |
| Parties | , Unempl.Ins.Rep. CCH 16109A Carol M. CRONKHITE, Appellant, v. Louis SULLIVAN, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit |
Ronald R. Notermann, Minneapolis, Minn., for appellant.
Edward P. Studzinski, Chicago, Ill., for appellee.
Before ARNOLD, WOLLMAN and BEAM, Circuit Judges.
Carol M. Cronkhite appeals the judgment of the district court 1 adopting the magistrate judge's 2 recommendation to uphold the Secretary's decision denying her social security disability insurance benefits. We affirm.
Cronkhite alleged disability as of October 1984 because of her inability to tolerate many environmental irritants, such as fragrances, smoke, and gasoline. The Secretary determined after a hearing that Cronkhite did not have a severe impairment and denied benefits. The district court found that substantial evidence on the record as a whole supported a finding that Cronkhite did have a severe impairment, and remanded the case to the Secretary for further proceedings. On remand, a vocational expert (VE) testified at a supplemental hearing, and the Secretary again denied benefits, finding that Cronkhite could do sedentary jobs in "clean environments," particularly if she wore a face mask and gloves. The district court affirmed, and Cronkhite now appeals.
We agree with the district court that the Secretary's decision to deny benefits is supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole. See Jackson v. Bowen, 873 F.2d 1111, 1113 (8th Cir.1989). We reject Cronkhite's argument that the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) made insufficient findings with regard to the types of jobs available in "clean environments." This case can be distinguished from Asher v. Bowen, 837 F.2d 825 (8th Cir.1988), and Warmoth v. Bowen, 798 F.2d 1109 (7th Cir.1986) (per curiam), because here, the ALJ utilized vocational expert testimony to identify specific jobs available in such environments. We find no error in the ALJ's suggestion that Cronkhite could wear a face mask and gloves while working if desired, especially since Cronkhite wore a face mask during the supplemental hearing and testified she used a mask and gloves at other times to avoid irritants.
We also reject Cronkhite's argument that the ALJ's hypothetical question to the VE failed to include all of Cronkhite's impairments. The question included Cronkhite's age; education; superior intellectual ability and range of vocational interests; past work experience; daily limitations and home environment; "unconventional" allergic reactions, the frequency of which depended upon fortuitous contact with irritants; and inability to work due to fatigue for a period after a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Flaherty v. Halter
...be "treating source" worth deference because they are not included in the list of "acceptable medical sources"); cf. Cronkhite v. Sullivan, 935 F.2d 133, 134 (8th Cir.1991) (ALJ properly gave little weight to treating chiropractor because chiropractor was not "acceptable source"). Because M......
-
Mandziej v. Chater
...impairment less weight. Diaz v. Secretary of Health & Human Servs., 59 F.3d 307, 314 (2d Cir.1995); Cronkhite v. Secretary of Health & Human Servs., 935 F.2d 133, 134 (8th Cir.1991). See also 20 C.F.R. § ...
-
Wolfe v. Shalala
...even if it is done on a part time basis"); Pitts, 923 F.2d at 565. As such, they were properly disregarded. Cronkhite v. Sullivan, 935 F.2d 133, 134 (8th Cir.1991). B. Residual Functional Having found substantial evidence in the record to support the ALJ's determination that Mr. Wolfe's pas......
-
Sexton v. Berryhill, 18-CV-1024-LTS
...be used to establish how Claimant's impairments affect his ability to function. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1513(a)(2)(3); Cronkhite v. Sullivan, 935 F.2d 133, 134 (8th Cir. 1991) (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.1513); SSR 06-03p, 2006 WL 2263437 (Aug. 9, 2006) (listing physicians, psychologists, optometri......
-
Case survey
...affects a claimant’s ability to work.” Craig v. Chater , 943 F. Supp. 1184, 1189 (W.D. Mo. 1996), citing Cronkhite v. Sullivan , 935 F.2d 133, 134 (8th Cir. 1991). (3) In Barry v. Shalala , 885 F. Supp. 1224, 1254 n.45 (N.D. Iowa 1995), the court recognized that the regulations provide that......
-
Issue Topics
...because such evidence is not considered an “acceptable source” of medical information to prove disability. Cronkhite v. Sullivan , 935 F.2d 133, 134 (8th Cir. 1991). In Cronkhite , the Eighth Circuit concluded that the ALJ properly included only the claimant’s impairments accepted as true i......
-
Issue topics
...because such evidence is not considered an “acceptable source” of medical information to prove disability. Cronkhite v. Sullivan , 935 F.2d 133, 134 (8th Cir. 1991). In Cronkhite , the Eighth Circuit concluded that the ALJ properly included only the claimant’s impairments accepted as true i......
-
Issue topics
...because such evidence is not considered an “acceptable source” of medical information to prove disability. Cronkhite v. Sullivan , 935 F.2d 133, 134 (8th Cir. 1991). In Cronkhite , the Eighth Circuit concluded that the ALJ properly included only the claimant’s ISSUE TOPICS §1203.15 impairme......