Mccoy v. Astrue

Decision Date04 August 2011
Docket NumberNo. 10–3555.,10–3555.
Citation648 F.3d 605,170 Soc.Sec.Rep.Serv. 19
PartiesSteve L. McCOY, Appellant,v.Michael J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, Appellee.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Stephen Speicher, argued, Lincoln, NE, for appellant.

Jeremiah D. Hayes, Special AUSA, argued, Kristi A. Schmidt, Chief Counsel, SSA, on the brief, Kansas City, MO, for appellee.Before MURPHY, BEAM, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.BEAM, Circuit Judge.

Appellant Steve McCoy challenges the district court's 1 affirmance of the Social Security Administration's (SSA) denial of McCoy's claim for disability benefits. We affirm.

I. BACKGROUND

McCoy alleges he is disabled as a result of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), Parkinson's disease, Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD), and peripheral neuropathy. McCoy contends that the mental and physical limitations he has as a result of these conditions, combined with his advanced age and limited job skills, render him unable to perform any work available in the national economy.

McCoy, born on April 25, 1949, was 53 years old at the time of his alleged disability-onset date and 56 years old on his date last insured. McCoy has a general equivalency diploma, which he earned while serving in the military. McCoy's three years of military service included a deployment to Vietnam. His service ended with a dishonorable discharge, leaving him ineligible for veterans benefits. McCoy failed to provide the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) with a complete and detailed overview of his post-military work history. However, it appears McCoy worked intermittently in a number of unskilled jobs, including in positions as an automatic machine attendant, a product tester, and a packer. The record indicates McCoy worked as a heavy general laborer between 1987 and 1993 and worked other short-term temporary jobs between 1993 and March 2001. McCoy has not worked outside the home since March 2001.

On October 26, 2004, McCoy filed an application for benefits, alleging disability beginning on September 15, 2000. After McCoy's claim was denied initially and on reconsideration, he requested a hearing, which was held on January 17, 2007. At the hearing, McCoy amended his alleged disability-onset date to February 1, 2003. McCoy stopped working in March 2001, and his date last insured was March 31, 2006. Thus, to qualify for disability benefits, McCoy is required to prove that he was disabled between February 2003 and March 2006. See Tilley v. Astrue, 580 F.3d 675, 676 (8th Cir.2009).

On October 28, 2002, four months before his alleged disability-onset date, McCoy saw his primary care physician, Steven Saathoff, M.D., complaining of hand tremors, trouble sleeping, intrusive thoughts, depression, and anxiety. Upon examining McCoy, Dr. Saathoff noted that McCoy retained normal muscle strength and gait, but observed a fine tremor in McCoy's hands. Dr. Saathoff prescribed McCoy medicine for his PTSD symptoms, but did not prescribe any medication for McCoy's tremor at that time.

Over the next three years, McCoy made a series of visits to various healthcare providers. This series included several trips back to Dr. Saathoff, visits with neurologist John Puente, M.D., and, beginning in 2004, weekly visits with a licensed mental health practitioner Janet Waage Lingren, Ed.D. Dr. Saathoff continued to treat McCoy's PTSD symptoms with medication, and monitored his hand tremor, eventually prescribing medication for that as well. In 2004, Dr. Saathoff referred McCoy to Dr. Puente for further evaluation and treatment of his hand tremor. Dr. Puente concluded that McCoy's tremor likely was partially caused by his PTSD but that it also seemed to have an “essential” neurological component. Eventually, Dr. Puente diagnosed McCoy with “likely” Parkinson's disease and treated him accordingly. Starting in 2004, McCoy also had weekly sessions with Dr. Lingren, who provided general counseling and “neurofeedback” to treat McCoy's PTSD symptoms. In addition to regularly visiting these treating physicians, McCoy underwent a number of consultative disability evaluations between 2003 and 2007, visiting Ruilin Wang, M.D., psychologist William R. Stone, Ph.D., agency psychologist Linda Schmechel, Ph.D., psychiatrist Mohammad S. Kamal, M.D., and neuropsychologist Robert Arias, Ph.D. The administrative record contains extensive documentation of these medical visits.

The healthcare providers who treated and examined McCoy came to somewhat varied conclusions about the severity of McCoy's condition and the significance of his resulting limitations during his insured period. McCoy's counselor, Dr. Lingren, expressed the most significant concerns about the limitations that McCoy's condition would impose on his ability to work. Ultimately, she concluded in a 2005 report prepared in conjunction with McCoy's disability application that McCoy's “ability to do work related activities such as sitting, standing, lifting, carrying, and handling objects has been dramatically compromised because of the tremors” and that his ability to concentrate and sustain social interactions was “very limited” because of his PTSD and Parkinson's-related symptoms. At one point, Dr. Puente also indicated that McCoy had significant cognitive limitations; in a 2005 Residual Functioning Capacity (RFC) assessment, Dr. Puente noted “marked” limitations in areas related to memory and concentration.

On the other hand, a number of the healthcare providers who treated McCoy during this same period concluded that his physical and mental limitations were minor and that his most significant limitations were social and emotional. During a July 2004 exam, Dr. Saathoff noted that, despite McCoy's tremor, McCoy retained muscle strength rated at “5/5” in his upper and lower extremities and a “normal” gait. In 2004, Dr. Stone, who performed multiple consultative exams on McCoy, noted that McCoy did not display “any remarkable involuntary movements [or] gross peculiarities of posture or gait” and that, despite a diagnosis of PTSD, McCoy was generally capable of performing mental work-related functions. Dr. Stone did note that, as a result of his PTSD and personality disorder, McCoy had some prohibitive social limitations that undermined his ability to engage in ongoing interaction with the public or cooperative work with supervisors or coworkers. Similarly, in 2005, Dr. Kamal saw McCoy for a consultative exam and concluded that McCoy had the ability to concentrate on and complete tasks and to follow and complete instructions, but that he may have a limited ability to relate to coworkers and supervisors because of his PTSD-related symptoms. Neuropsychological testing conducted by Dr. Stone in 2005 also revealed no significant memory or cognitive impairment. After reviewing the test results, Dr. Stone concluded McCoy was “generally capable of sustaining concentration and attention” with only brief periods of “decreasing frequency” where intrusive thoughts reduced his attention capacity to “low average” and that his social impairments would not “be prohibitive in the kinds of relatively superficial relationships typical for jobs.” Similarly, a neuropsychological exam conducted by Dr. Arias in January 2007—after McCoy's insured status had expired—indicated moderate memory-retrieval impairment but noted otherwise normal cognitive performance with perceptual-organization skills in the “superior” range.

In addition to the voluminous medical evidence, the ALJ also considered evidence of McCoy's daily activities during his insured period. In 2003, McCoy filled out a Daily Activities and Symptoms Report. He indicated that his activities included gardening, mowing the lawn, watching television, and visiting his family. McCoy's wife filled out a Supplemental Information Form at the same time, indicating that McCoy helped with childcare and pet care and that he “independently and appropriately” assisted with home-schooling his autistic daughter. In a December 2004 Supplemental Disability Report, McCoy continued to indicate he did yard work, gardened, and drove three times per week. As late as July 2006, McCoy reported mowing the lawn in the high heat. However, at his disability hearing, McCoy indicated that he could not do “anything” at home because of his inability to focus and because of his neuropathy. Upon further questioning, McCoy admitted that he helped get his children ready for school, helped home-school his daughter, occasionally drove, and helped with the children once they got home from school. However, he maintained that he was not able to focus on any of this because of intrusive thoughts. McCoy also said that he used a cane all the time because he was in significant pain, but that he did not have the cane with him that day because it was broken. McCoy further indicated that he could only walk about fifty feet and that he could not wear shoes.

After considering the medical evidence and McCoy's testimony, the ALJ examined Michael McKeeman, a vocational expert (VE). Based on the ALJ's evaluation of the evidence, the ALJ posed a hypothetical to McKeeman about whether someone in McCoy's position would be able to find work in the national economy.2 The ALJ asked what jobs would be available to a worker with McCoy's age, education, and work experience who: (1) could do only routine repetitive unskilled work with ordinary supervision; (2) could not set goals or deal with job changes; (3) could have only brief or superficial interactions with coworkers, supervisors, and the public; and (4) was limited to occasional fingering due to a mild tremor. The VE said a person in that position could perform approximately fifty percent of light or medium jobs and would have a “wide range” of employment options. The VE noted, however, that if he took McCoy's testimony at the hearing as fully credible—including his claims that he could...

To continue reading

Request your trial
1407 cases
  • Englerth v. Colvin
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Missouri
    • September 29, 2016
    ...is not required to refute every possible limitation suggested by the record or by any particular medical source. See McCoy v. Astrue, 648 F3d 605, 615 (8th Cir. 2011) ("We review the record to ensure that an ALJ does not disregard evidence or ignore potential limitations, but we do not requ......
  • Eddington v. Colvin
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Iowa
    • September 24, 2015
    ...143 F.3d 383, 386 (8th Cir. 1998)). The ALJ is not required to mechanically list and reject every possible limitation. McCoy v. Astrue, 648 F.3d 605, 615 (8th Cir. 2011). Furthermore, "[a]n ALJ's failure to cite specific evidence does not indicate that such evidence was not considered." Wil......
  • Miles v. Colvin
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Missouri
    • September 28, 2015
    ...Questionnaire reflected Plaintiff's input more than Ms. Khatiwada's conclusions about his abilities. (Tr. 332-33). See McCoy v. Astrue, 648 F.3d 605, 617 (8th Cir. 2011) (ALJ properly discounted doctor's opinion where evaluation was based, at least in part, on claimant's self-reported sympt......
  • Fleming-Griffin v. Colvin, Case No. 2:13CV69 CAS (NCC)
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Missouri
    • August 12, 2014
    ...given the court's finding above that Plaintiff's allegations regarding her limitations are less than credible. See McCoy v. Astrue, 648 F.3d 605, 617 (8th Cir. 2011) (ALJ properly discounted doctor's opinion where evaluation was based, at least in part, on claimant's self-reported symptoms;......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
4 books & journal articles
  • Table of Cases
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Bohr's Social Security Issues Annotated - Volume II
    • May 4, 2015
    ...392, 398 (E.D. Mich. 1994), § 1207.1 McCoy ex rel. McCoy v. Chater , 81 F.3d 44, 46 (6th Cir. 1995), §§ 317.1, 1317 McCoy v. Astrue , 648 F.3d 605 (8th Cir. Aug. 4, 2011), 8th-11 McCoy v. Barnhart , 309 F. Supp.2d 1281, 1284 (D. Kan.2004), § 1803.1 Table of Cases McCoy v. Schweiker , 683 F.......
  • Case index
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Archive Social Security Issues Annotated. Vol. I - 2014 Preliminary Sections
    • August 2, 2014
    ..., 204 F.3d 780 (7 th Cir. Feb. 22, 2000), 7 th -00 Hamlin v. Barnhart, 365 F.3d 1208 (10 th Cir. May 4, 2004), 10 th -04 McCoy v. Astrue , 648 F.3d 605 (8 th Cir. Aug. 4, 2011), 8 th -11 Pinto v. Massanari, 249 F.3d 840 (9 th Cir. May 1, 2001), 9 th -01 § 105.5 Sit/Stand Option and its Impa......
  • Table of cases
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Archive Social Security Issues Annotated. Vol. II - 2014 Contents
    • August 3, 2014
    ...392, 398 (E.D. Mich. 1994), § 1207.1 McCoy ex rel. McCoy v. Chater , 81 F.3d 44, 46 (6th Cir. 1995), §§ 317.1, 1317 McCoy v. Astrue , 648 F.3d 605 (8th Cir. Aug. 4, 2011), 8th-11 McCoy v. Barnhart , 309 F. Supp.2d 1281, 1284 (D. Kan.2004), § 1803.1 McCoy v. Schweiker , 683 F.2d 1138, 1146-4......
  • Case Index
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Bohr's Social Security Issues Annotated - Volume I
    • May 4, 2015
    ..., 204 F.3d 780 (7th Cir. Feb. 22, 2000), 7th-00 Hamlin v. Barnhart , 365 F.3d 1208 (10th Cir. May 4, 2004), 10th-04 McCoy v. Astrue , 648 F.3d 605 (8th Cir. Aug. 4, 2011), 8th-11 Pinto v. Massanari , 249 F.3d 840 (9th Cir. May 1, 2001), 9th-01 § 105.5. Sit/Stand Option and its Impact on RFC......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT