Walker v. Bowen

Decision Date08 September 1987
Docket NumberNo. 86-3204,86-3204
Citation826 F.2d 996
Parties, Unempl.Ins.Rep. CCH 17,552 Thelma L. WALKER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Otis R. BOWEN, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant-Appellee.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Eleventh Circuit

William C. Davis, Jacksonville, Fla., for plaintiff-appellant.

John E. Lawlor, III, Asst. U.S. Atty., Jacksonville, Fla., for defendant-appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida.

Before ANDERSON and CLARK, Circuit Judges, SIMPSON *, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

Thelma L. Walker appeals from the district court's affirmance of the decision by the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) denying her claim for supplemental security income and disability insurance benefits. We reverse the district court's order and remand this case to the Secretary because we find (1) the evidence is insufficient to support the conclusion that Walker can perform a reduced range of light work and the full range of sedentary work; (2) the Secretary improperly relied upon the Medical Vocational Guidelines, 20 C.F.R. pt., 404, subpt. P, app. II (the grids), to determine that Walker is not disabled; and (3) the Secretary used an incorrect legal standard to assess Walker's complaints of disabling pain.

BACKGROUND

On October 26, 1983, Thelma L. Walker filed her third application for supplemental security income and disability insurance benefits. She alleged that she had been disabled since November 30, 1975, due to a serious foot injury and high-blood pressure. Walker's first and second applications had been granted and subsequently terminated. The instant application was denied initially and upon reconsideration.

Walker received a hearing before an ALJ on July 16, 1984. Walker, 48 years old at the time of the hearing, testified that she had a fourth grade education and was the mother of eight children. Walker had no work experience prior to 1982, when she secured a part-time job requiring her to ride on a bus that transported handicapped children to school. She testified that during the summer she works two hours in the morning and two hours in the afternoon, with a three and one-half hour break between shifts. During the winter, Walker stated that she works two and one-half hours in the morning and three hours in the afternoon, with a five-hour break between shifts. She earns approximately $175 per week.

Walker testified about her physical impairments as follows. (See Record, Tab 5, Hearing Decision (Aug. 3, 1984) at 20-49). In 1975, she received a gunshot wound in her left ankle. The ankle had to be fused surgically. She has no movement in the ankle, and sometimes falls because of balance problems. She does some shopping and housework, including cooking and washing. She suffers pain and swelling in the left foot and ankle, which can make her whole leg tremble and vibrate. She requires a cane to walk, although she is able to work without it because the school bus has railings with which she can support herself. Her job causes her increased pain and swelling in both legs, and she rests at home between shifts. The doctor told her that the pain in her right knee, which bothers her most when bending and using stairs, was probably arthritis. She also has problems with her right arm, which was diagnosed as phlebitis. In addition, she suffers gastrointestinal pain, which is accompanied by vomiting and bleeding when she is under stress. She is also periodically subject to asthma.

Surgery on Walker's foot was performed by Dr. Oscar Gunther, an orthopedic surgeon, who stated in his July 15, 1982 report that: "She has had a few surgeries in that foot, and I have treated her all along. In my opinion this patient is unable to hold a job which requires walking or standing on account of the problem that she has in that left foot."

In January, 1984, Walker was examined by Dr. Perry Carlos at the request of the Office of Disability Determinations. He confirmed that Walker had "had surgery to replace the shattered ankle bone and had internal fixation which left her without dorsiflexion or extension." Dr. Carlos found that Walker was unable to hop, squat, tandem gait or heel toe walk, that she "appeared unable to maintain stability on her left ankle," and that "[t]he only way the patient could walk without the cane was holding on to the exam table or the counters." Dr. Carlos also found that she suffered from arthralgias of the right knee. Dr. Carlos' conclusion about Walker was as follows:

Patient has obvious difficulty ambulating due to her previous injury of the left ankle. This is further complicated by patient's obesity. I believe that patient requires an assistive device to ambulate even for short distances effectively.

Walker was treated by Dr. William Bosworth for generalized complaints. In July, 1982, he diagnosed her as having hypertension and gastrointestional problems, and noted that these conditions were controlled by medication. His report of December 2, 1983 stated that Walker had no serious physical disability other than gastrointestional episodes, which may be aggravated by stressful employment. However, the report discussed only Walker's hypertension and stomach problems, and made no reference whatsoever to her orthopedic problems. On January 30, 1984, Dr. Bosworth diagnosed phlebitis in Walker's upper right arm.

The ALJ considered the above medical evidence and the evidence introduced at a prior hearing and made the following findings:

1. Claimant has not engaged in substantial gainful activity since November 30, 1975.

2. The medical evidence establishes that claimant has severe arthrodesis of the left ankle secondary to aged surgical fusion due to gunshot wound, and obesity, but that she does not have an impairment or combination of impairments listed in, or medically equal to one listed in Appendix 1, Subpart P, Regulations No. 4.

3. Although claimant subjectively complains of multiple arthralgias affecting multiple musculoskeletal joints and other symptoms related to gastrointestinal problems neither the medical evidence nor claimant's testimony establishes the existence of severe, unremitting pain of a disabling nature.

4. Claimant has the residual functional capacity to perform the physical exertion requirements of work except for prolong walking or standing or repetitive bending and stooping. There are no nonexertional limitations (20 CFR 416.945).

5. Claimant has the residual functional capacity to perform a reduced range of light work and the full range of sedentary work (20 CFR 416.967).

6. Claimant is 48 years old, which is defined as a younger individual (20 CFR 416.963).

7. The claimant has a marginal 4th grade education (20 CFR 416.964).

8. Section 416.969 of Regulations No. 4 and Rules 201.18, Table No. 1 of Appendix 2, Subpart P, Regulations No. 4, direct a conclusion that, considering the claimant's residual functional capacity, age, education, and work experience, she is not disabled.

9. Claimant was not under a "disability," as defined in the Social Security Act, at any time through the date of this decision (20 CFR 416.920(f)).

Record, Tab 5, Hearing Decision (Aug. 3, 1984) at 4.

The Appeals Council denied review, thus making the ALJ's decision the final decision of the Secretary. Walker appealed to the district court, which adopted the magistrate's recommendation that the Secretary's decision be affirmed. Walker now appeals to this court.

DISCUSSION

A claimant is entitled to disability benefits when she is unable to "engage in any substantial gainful activity by reason of any medically determinable physical or mental impairment...." 42 U.S.C. Sec. 423(d)(1)(A) (1982). The claimant bears the initial burden of proving that she is unable to perform her previous work. Jones v. Bowen, 810 F.2d 1001 (11th Cir.1986). It is well established that "[i]n determining whether the claimant has satisfied this initial burden, the examiner must consider four factors: (1) objective medical facts or clinical findings; (2) diagnoses of examining physicians; (3) evidence of pain; and (4) the claimant's age, education, and work history." Id. at 1005 (citation omitted). Once claimant meets her burden, the burden shifts to the Secretary to prove that claimant is capable, considering her age, education, and work experience, of engaging in another kind of substantial gainful employment which exists in the national economy. Sryock v. Heckler, 764 F.2d 834, 836 (11th Cir.1985); see 42 U.S.C. Sec. 423(d)(2)(A). In reviewing the evidence before us, we must find the Secretary's decision conclusive if it is supported by substantial evidence. Bridges v. Bowen, 815 F.2d 622, 624 (11th Cir.1987); 42 U.S.C. Sec. 405(g). Despite this limited review, we scrutinize the record in its entirety to determine the reasonableness of the secretary's factual findings. Bridges, 815 F.2d at 624; Arnold v. Heckler, 732 F.2d 881, 883 (11th Cir.1984). No similar presumption of validity attaches to the Secretary's legal conclusions, including determination of the proper standards to be applied in evaluating claims. Wiggins v. Schweiker, 679 F.2d 1387, 1389 (11th Cir.1982).

On appeal, Walker contends: (1) that the ALJ's determination that she could perform sedentary work is not supported by substantial evidence; (2) that the ALJ erroneously relied upon the grids; and (3) that the ALJ improperly evaluated her pain complaints. We consider these contentions separately, concluding that the ALJ wrongly decided each of these issues and that the district court erred in approving the ALJ's decision.

I. Whether The ALJ's Determination That Walker Could Perform Sedentary Work Is Supported By The Evidence.

Walker claims that constant pain in her left ankle that moves up to the calf of her left leg, pain caused by recurring gastrointestinal problems, and pain in her right knee and right arm prevent her from performing sedentary work. She...

To continue reading

Request your trial
1951 cases
  • Rease v. Barnhart, No. 1:04-CV-3239-JMF.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Georgia
    • 12 April 2006
    ...as not credible, provided he articulates specific reasons for his decision that the claimant is not fully credible. Walker v. Bowen, 826 F.2d 996 (11th Cir.1987); Hale v. Bowen, supra; MacGregor v. Bowen, 786 F.2d 1050, 1054 (11th Cir.1986). The Eleventh Circuit does not require an explicit......
  • Hurley v. Barnhart, No. 6:03 CV 1624 ORL JGG.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Middle District of Florida
    • 23 February 2005
    ...functional level or when a claimant has a non-exertional impairment that significantly limits basic work skills." Walker v. Bowen, 826 F.2d 996, 1002-03 (11th Cir.1987). In almost all of such cases, the Commissioner's burden can be met only through the use of a vocational expert. Foote, 67 ......
  • Baguer v. Apfel
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Middle District of Florida
    • 17 September 1999
    ...functional level or when a claimant has a non-exertional impairment that significantly limits basic work skills." Walker v. Bowen, 826 F.2d 996, 1002-03 (11th Cir. 1987). In almost all of such cases, the Commissioner's burden can be met only through the use of a vocational expert. Foote, 67......
  • Houston v. Colvin, CASE NO. 7:13-cv-00208-JEO
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Alabama
    • 14 February 2014
    ...disabled based on a combination of impairments even though none of the individual impairments alone are disabling. Walker v. Brown, 826 F.2d 996, 1001 (11th Cir. 1985); see also 20 C.F.R. § 404.1523; 20 C.F.R. § 416.923. A claimant has the burden to show that he has a severe impairment or c......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
8 books & journal articles
  • Prehearing Procedure
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Archive Social Security Disability Practice. Volume One - 2017 Contents
    • 18 August 2017
    ...of sedentary work because one sometimes needs two free hands to carry some objects encountered on sedentary jobs. See Walker v. Bowen, 826 F.2d 996, 1003 (11th Cir. 1987). SSR 96-9p says that if a cane, which it calls a “medically required hand-held assistive device” is needed only for prol......
  • Prehearing Procedure
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Archive Social Security Disability Practice. Volume One - 2015 Contents
    • 18 August 2015
    ...of sedentary work because one sometimes needs two free hands to carry some objects encountered on sedentary jobs. See Walker v. Bowen, 826 F.2d 996, 1003 (11th Cir. 1987). SSR 96-9p says that if a cane, which it calls a “medically required hand-held assistive device” is needed only for prol......
  • Prehearing procedure
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Social Security Disability Practice. Volume 1-2 Volume 1
    • 4 May 2022
    ...of sedentary work because one sometimes needs two free hands to carry some objects encountered on sedentary jobs. See Walker v. Bowen, 826 F.2d 996, 1003 (11th Cir. 1987). SSR 96-9p says that if a cane, which it calls a “medically required hand-held assistive device” is needed only for prol......
  • Issue Topics
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Social Security Disability Collection - James' Best Materials. Volume 2
    • 5 May 2015
    ...Circuit found that the claimant, who required an assistive device to ambulate, suffered from a manipulative limitation. Walker v. Bowen , 826 F.2d 996, 1003 (11th Cir. 1987). The ALJ erred in failing to make a specific finding as to whether the nonexertional §1107.15 Social Security DiSabil......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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