DeFrancesco v. Bowen, No. 87 C 5091.

• Court: United States District Courts. 7th Circuit. United States District Court (Northern District of Illinois)
• Writing for the Court: BUA
• Citation: 679 F. Supp. 785
• Docket Number: No. 87 C 5091.
• Decision Date: 24 February 1988
• Parties: Donald P. DeFRANCESCO, Plaintiff, v. Otis R. BOWEN, M.D., Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant.

679 F. Supp. 785

Donald P. DeFRANCESCO, Plaintiff,
v.
Otis R. BOWEN, M.D., Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant.

No. 87 C 5091.

United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, E.D.

February 24, 1988.

679 F. Supp. 786

Frederick J. Daley, Frederick J. Daley, Ltd., Chicago, Ill., for plaintiff.

Anton R. Valukas, U.S. Atty. by Thomas P. Walsh, Asst. U.S. Atty., Donna Morros Weinstein, Chief Counsel, Region V by Felisia Wesson, Asst. Regional Counsel, Dept. of Health and Human Services, Chicago, Ill., for defendant.

ORDER

BUA, District Judge.

Before this court are both parties' motions for summary judgment in a Social Security disability benefits case. For the reasons stated herein, defendant's motion is granted, and plaintiff's motion is denied.

I. FACTS

Plaintiff is a 50-year-old man with a high school education. He worked as a truck driver from 1957 to 1984. Between 1978 and 1984 plaintiff held a variety of delivery and service jobs which he allegedly was forced to leave because of his failing health. On October 16, 1985, plaintiff filed an application for Social Security disability benefits. The application alleged that plaintiff became disabled on February 21, 1984 by reason of two heart attacks, diabetes, and numbness in his feet and legs.

At an administrative hearing held on October 16, 1985, testimony was presented by plaintiff, plaintiff's son, and a medical advisor. Various medical reports prepared by physicians who examined plaintiff were also introduced. Based on the testimony and medical reports, the Administrative Law Judge ("ALJ") found that plaintiff's conditions, whether considered individually or in combination, do not equal the level of severity required for a finding of disability under the listing of impairments ("listings") contained in Subpart P, Appendix 1, of the regulations, 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(d), 416.920(d). In light of the evidence offered at the hearing, the ALJ determined that although plaintiff is precluded from doing his past relevant work, he retains the residual functional capacity to perform a full range of light work. Considering plaintiff's vocational factors, the ALJ relied on the medical-vocational guidelines ("grid") which directed a finding of not disabled. The Secretary of Health and Human Services' ("Secretary") Appeals Council denied plaintiff's request to review the ALJ's findings. Thus, the ALJ's ruling became the final decision of the Secretary.

II. DISCUSSION

To qualify for disability benefits, a person must be "unable to engage in any substantial gainful activity by reason of any medically determinable physical or mental impairment ... lasting at least a year." 42 U.S.C. § 416(i). The impairment "must be of such severity that the applicant is not only unable to do his previous work but cannot, considering his age, education, and work experience, engage in any other kind of substantial gainful work which exists in the national economy...." 42 U.S.C. §§ 423(d)(1)(A), (2)(A). The burden is on the claimant to demonstrate that he is no longer capable of performing his past relevant work. Wilkinson v. Schweiker, 640 F.2d 743, 744 (5th Cir.1981). If this burden is satisfied by the claimant, the burden shifts to the Secretary to show that the claimant is capable of engaging in some type of gainful activity. Ferguson v. Schweiker, 641 F.2d 243, 246 (5th Cir.1981).

The role of a court reviewing a denial of Social Security benefits is limited to a determination of whether substantial evidence supports the Secretary's decision. 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). Substantial evidence means such evidence that a reasonable mind would accept as adequate to...