Reinhart v. Secretary of Health & Human Services
| Decision Date | 04 May 1984 |
| Docket Number | No. 83-1340,83-1340 |
| Parties | , Unempl.Ins.Rep. CCH 15,297 Oliver T. REINHART, Jr., Appellant, v. SECRETARY, HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES, Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit |
J. Paul McGrath, Asst. Atty. Gen., Washington, D.C., George W. Proctor, U.S. Atty., Chalk S. Mitchell, Asst. U.S. Atty., Little Rock, Ark., Frank V. Smith, III, Regional Atty., W. Emmitt Roberts, Asst. Regional Atty., U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, Dallas, Tex., for appellee.
Cathey, Goodwin, Hamilton & Moore, Paragould, Ark., for appellant.
Before JOHN R. GIBSON and FAGG, Circuit Judges, and HUNTER, * Senior District Judge.
Oliver T. Reinhart, Jr., appeals from the district court's order affirming the Secretary of Health and Human Services' decision to deny his application for Social Security disability benefits. Reinhart alleges total disability for a period beginning January 1980 due to psychiatric problems, along with severe back, neck, and leg pain. The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) determined that Reinhart was not eligible to receive disability benefits because he did not suffer from a severe impairment expected to last for a continuous period of at least twelve months. See 20 C.F.R. Sec. 404.1505 (1983). This determination was upheld by the Appeals Council and the district court.
Reinhart has been diagnosed by his treating physicians, Drs. Sexton and Maddock, and his examining physicians, Drs. Belivacqua and Guthrie, as suffering from hysterical neurosis with conversion, a psychological disorder which transforms emotions into physical manifestations of pain. All of the physicians further recognize that Reinhart is frequently and severely depressed, with Dr. Belivacqua indicating his belief that Reinhart is potentially suicidal. Reinhart, at the administrative hearing, testified extensively as to the pain from which he is suffering and the effect that pain has on his daily activities. Reinhart's son and father both confirmed that Reinhart testified accurately respecting his daily activities and the problems he is having.
Our review of the record reveals that the Secretary failed properly to consider the uncontradicted medical evidence of record and failed properly to consider Reinhart's subjective complaints of pain in assessing his disability. We therefore remand to the Secretary for further consideration in light of this opinion.
The ALJ, in denying Reinhart's claim for benefits, failed properly to consider the uncontradicted medical opinions of four physicians who determined that Reinhart suffers from a medical condition that could be reasonably expected to produce pain. See 20 C.F.R. Sec. 404.1529 (1983). In assessing Reinhart's disability, the ALJ concluded that Reinhart has had no physical impairments since October 1977 and that his allegations of severe continuous pain are not credible. While the ALJ acknowledges that Reinhart has been diagnosed as suffering from hysterical neurosis with conversion, he totally ignores the significant role of this illness in causing pain. By concentrating on the fact that laboratory testings indicate that Reinhart's "spine is entirely normal both in the cervical and lumbar regions" and in paying only lip service to the physicians' diagnoses of a psychological illness which can cause real pain, the ALJ impliedly concludes that there is no medical evidence to substantiate Reinhart's allegations of severe continuous pain. The ALJ cannot simply ignore the uncontradicted medical evidence that Reinhart suffers from pain having its origin in a psychological disorder. See McDonald v. Schweiker, 698 F.2d 361, 365 (8th Cir.1983); Behnen v. Califano, 588 F.2d 252, 254 (8th Cir.1978); Klug v. Weinberger, 514 F.2d 423, 427 (8th Cir.1975).
The ALJ also failed properly to evaluate the impact of Reinhart's depression on his ability to engage in substantial gainful activity. Although Reinhart was hospitalized in both January and February of 1980 for severe depression with suicidal ideations, the ALJ states that Reinhart's "alleged disability is based primarily on his complaints of severe and debilitating pain * * *." The ALJ was obligated to consider the combined effect of Reinhart's impairments. 20 C.F.R. Sec. 404.1522 (1983). As stated by the court in Landess v. Weinberger, 490 F.2d 1187, 1190 (8th Cir.1974): Layton v. Heckler, 726 F.2d 440, 442 (8th Cir.1984) (quoting Landess v. Weinberger, supra, 490 F.2d at 1190).
Finally, we...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Sumler v. Bowen
...is under legal duty to consider subjective testimony even where it is not supported by objective medical evidence. Reinhart v. Secretary, 733 F.2d 571, 573 (8th Cir.1984); Basinger v. Heckler, 725 F.2d 1166, 1169 (8th Cir.1984). The ALJ failed to make specific findings regarding any of thes......
-
Norng v. Shalala, C94-4054.
...reject such complaints solely on the basis of personal observations made during the hearing." Id. (citing Reinhart v. Secretary, Health & Human Serv., 733 F.2d 571, 573 (8th Cir.1984)). Further, while an ALJ is permitted to take notice of the claimant's demeanor during an administrative hea......
-
Branson v. Callahan
...basis of personal observations made during the hearing." Smith v. Heckler, 735 F.2d 312 (8th Cir.1984) (citing Reinhart v. Secretary of H.H.S., 733 F.2d 571, 573 (8th Cir.1984)). Thus, an ALJ is permitted to take notice of a claimant's demeanor during an administrative hearing, but must not......
-
Anderson v. Callahan
...by medical reports in the record. See Mellon v. Heckler, 739 F.2d 1382, 1383 (8th Cir.1984); Reinhart v. Secretary of Health, & Human Services, 733 F.2d 571, 572-573 (8th Cir.1984). And, although credibility determinations are in the first instance for the ALJ and not the court, the ALJ's c......
-
Issue Topics
...in a psychological disorder.’” Id., quoting Mellon v. Heckler , 739 F.2d 1382, 1383 (8th Cir. 1984) ( quoting Reinhart v. Secretary , 733 F.2d 571, 572-73 (8th Cir. 1984)). In any event, the doctors who examined and treated O’Donnell more recently did not indicate that she was magnifying he......
-
Issue topics
...in a psychological disorder.’” Id., quoting Mellon v. Heckler , 739 F.2d 1382, 1383 (8 th Cir. 1984) ( quoting Reinhart v. Secretary , 733 F.2d 571, 572-73 (8 th Cir. 1984)). In any event, the doctors who examined and treated O’Donnell more recently did not indicate that she was magnifying ......
-
Table of Cases
...v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 769 F.3d 861 (4th Cir. Sept. 16, 2014, as amended), 4 th -14 Reinhart v. Secretary of Health, & Human Servs ., 733 F.2d 571, 572-573 (8th Cir. 1984), 8th-03, §§ 205.16, 205.17, 1205 Remilliard v. Apfel , No. 97-35374, 139 F.3d 907 (Table), 1998 WL 75535 at *1 (9th Ci......
-
Assessment of disability issues
...and in fact approached the “sit and squirm” test strictly prohibited by the Eighth Circuit. Id. , citing Reinhart v. Sec’y of HHS , 733 F.2d 571, 573 (8 th Cir. 1984). The court observed that while the ALJ noted that during the hearing the claimant did not seem to be distracted by pain, the......