Wilson v. Barnhart

Decision Date06 March 2002
Docket NumberNo. 01-14542 Non-Argument Calendar.,01-14542 Non-Argument Calendar.
Citation284 F.3d 1219
PartiesAndrew T. WILSON, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jo Anne B. BARNHART, Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, Defendant-Appellant.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Eleventh Circuit

Haila Naomi Kleinman, Mary Ann Sloan, Douglas Wilson, Jerome Albanese, Shirley I. McCarty, Dennis R. Williams, Office of General Counsel, SSA, Atl. Fed. Ctr., Atlanta, GA, for Defendant-Appellant.

Daco S. Auffenorde, Auffenorde & Auffenorde, P.C., Huntsville, AL, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama.

Before CARNES, HULL and MARCUS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Jo Anne B. Barnhart, Commissioner of the Social Security Administration ("Commissioner"), appeals the district court's order reversing the Commissioner's denial of Andrew T. Wilson's application for disability and disability insurance benefits, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). Our review of the Commissioner's decision is limited to an inquiry into whether there is substantial evidence to support the findings of the Commissioner, and whether the correct legal standards were applied. See 42 U.S.C. § 405(g); Lamb v. Bowen, 847 F.2d 698, 701 (11th Cir.1988); McRoberts v. Bowen, 841 F.2d 1077, 1080 (11th Cir.1988). Substantial evidence "must do more than create a suspicion of the existence of the fact to be established." McRoberts, 841 F.2d at 1080. The Commissioner's factual findings are conclusive if supported by substantial evidence. Martin v. Sullivan, 894 F.2d 1520, 1529 (11th Cir.1990); Allen v. Bowen, 816 F.2d 600, 602 (11th Cir.1987). We review de novo the district court's decision on whether substantial evidence supports the ALJ's decision. See Falge v. Apfel, 150 F.3d 1320, 1322 (11th Cir.1998).

Upon thorough review of the record, as well as careful consideration of the parties' briefs, we find that the ALJ's decision was supported by substantial evidence, and that the district court erred by reversing that decision. Accordingly, we reverse and remand the district court's opinion.

The relevant facts are straightforward. Wilson applied for disability insurance benefits on September 19, 1996, alleging disability as of February 2, 1982. His application was denied initially and on reconsideration. Wilson then applied for a hearing before an administrative law judge. At the time of the hearing, Wilson was 40 years old, weighed 135 pounds, had completed bachelor of science degrees in math and physics, and had been a radar and computer technician in the military.

The medical evidence established that Wilson was involved in a motorcycle accident on February 2, 1982, which resulted in blunt abdominal trauma with intra-peritoneal hemorrhage. On January 20, 1983 and May 16, 1984, doctors at the Fox Army Medical Center diagnosed Wilson with the following conditions: (1) malnutrition secondary to short gut syndrome (hyper alimentation); (2) short bowel syndrome with interference in absorption and nutrition secondary to massive small bowel resection; (3) status post multiple trauma including lacerated spleen, lacerated liver, lacerated small bowel mesentery with complete transecting of the superior mesenteric artery and vein; (4) contusion of the head of the pancreas and laceration of the proximal jejunum; (5) instability secondary to fracture of medial tibial plateau with complete disruption of the lateral collateral ligament; (6) incomplete paralysis of common peroneal nerve, left, with foot drop; and (7) status post abdominal sepsis.

Wilson testified at the hearing that he had suffered injury to his bowels and knee, and that he had been required to have a large portion of his bowels and his spleen removed. Several of Wilson's arteries and veins had to be operated on to correct blood flow, and he suffered a contusion to the head of his pancreas and a laceration of the proximal jejunoileal. He had developed short bowel syndrome, which caused him to develop chronic kidney stones and required that he eat six meals per day. Wilson testified that he experienced chronic fatigue and pain for which he had to take pain medication. Other than internal injuries, Wilson testified that he fractured his knee in the accident, which also caused him pain and for which he used the assistance of a cane to walk.

A vocational expert ("VE") testified during the hearing. The ALJ posed two hypothetical situations to the VE. In the first hypothetical, the ALJ asked the VE to consider a person of Wilson's age, education, past work experience, with no more than moderate pain, who suffered the following limitations: (1) the ability to work at only a sedentary exertional level; (2) an inability to stand or walk for more than one hour continuously; (3) an inability to squat; (4) the need for additional meals; (5) bowel or urinary incontinence; (6) an inability to work at unprotected heights; and (7) an inability to work around hazardous moving machinery. The VE opined that a person with these limitations could not perform Wilson's past relevant work. The VE stated, however, that based on his prior work, Wilson's skills would transfer to certain sedentary positions, such as a computer operator, data entry clerk, or computer programmer. In the second hypothetical, the ALJ asked the VE to assume that Wilson's testimony was credible in all respects. The ALJ then asked if there was other work Wilson could perform. The VE answered in the negative.

In addition to Wilson's and the VE's testimonies, the ALJ considered the following medical evidence prior to concluding that Wilson did not receive significant medical treatment during the period from December 1986, one year prior to the date he was last insured, through December 31, 1992, five years after the date he was last insured: (1) on August 24, 1992, Wilson's vision was checked at the Veterans Administration Outpatient Clinic and it was determined he needed a new prescription; (2) several dental procedures were performed on Wilson at that same facility; (3) in January 1984, Wilson reported some weakness but was otherwise feeling okay; (4) in August 1984, Wilson reported doing well, with no change in bowel habits being reported; (5) in May 1985, Wilson reported a toe injury while swimming; (6) in August and September 1985, Wilson reported dizziness, a condition that was resolved in October 1985; and (7) in March 1986, Wilson reported he was doing well and weighed 128 pounds, but complained of occasional pain and swelling in his left knee.

Notably, the medical records after December 1986 through early 1992 reveal that Wilson's medical treatment consisted almost exclusively of vitamin B12 shots, with visits in January and February 1989 related to removal of moles, in April 1991 related to an enlarged testicle, and in August 1992, related to pain in Wilson's ankle while riding a bicycle.

The record also reflects that Wilson received a Bachelor of Science degree in math on December 14, 1986, and in physics on June 29, 1992. Wilson maintained continuous course work for nearly all quarters from 1983 to 1992. Although he was admitted to the physics graduate program, he withdrew from that program before completion.

The ALJ concluded that "there is no objective medical evidence confirming the severity of the alleged symptoms arising from that condition(s) or that the objectively determined medical condition(s) were of such severity that they could reasonably be expected to give rise to the alleged symptoms." The ALJ highlighted the following as evidence that was inconsistent with Wilson's allegations of an inability to work: (1) Wilson returned to college in the fall of 1983, 18 months after his accident, where he completed two degrees; (2) in April 1994, Wilson was reported to be eating three meals per day plus snacks and weighed 129.4 pounds; (3) in August 1996, Wilson complained of right shoulder pain and he worked on the computer; and (4) other than consistent visits to receive vitamin B12 shots, the record showed that Wilson did not receive significant medical treatment during the period from December 1986, one year prior to his date last insured, through December 31, 1992, five years after his date last insured.

After describing Wilson's medical history and analyzing its import, the ALJ made the following findings: (1) Wilson met the disability insured status requirements on February 2, 1982, the date Wilson stated that he was unable to work, and continued to meet those requirements through December 31, 1987, his date last insured, but not thereafter; (2) Wilson had not engaged in substantial, gainful activity since February 2, 1982; (3) although Wilson had received numerous injuries which constituted a "severe impairment," Wilson did not have an impairment or combination of impairments listed in, or medically equal to, one of the Listings of impairment found in 20 C.F.R. § 404, Subpt. P, App. 1; (4) on or before December 31, 1987, there was no objective clinical evidence of a condition which could reasonably be expected to produce the level of pain, lack of balance, numbness, weakness, lack of bowel control, fatigue, frequent need to eat, frequent need for bowel movements, headaches, need for additional rest during the day, or other symptoms to which Wilson testified; (5) Wilson was not credible in his description of the severity of these ailments; (6) on or before December 31, 1987, the claimant had the residual functional capacity to perform the requirements of sedentary work, except that sitting or walking could not exceed one hour continuously; (7) Wilson was unable to perform his past relevant work; (8) Wilson had acquired skills including computer skills, that could be applied to meet the requirements of skilled and semi-skilled work functions; and (9) Wilson was not under a "disability," as defined under the Social Security Act, for any consecutive 12 month period prior to December 1987,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3607 cases
  • Rease v. Barnhart, No. 1:04-CV-3239-JMF.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Georgia
    • 12 Abril 2006
    ...quotation is sufficient evidence that the ALJ considered the combined effect of the plaintiffs impairments. See Wilson v. Barnhart, 284 F.3d 1219,1224-25 (11th Cir. 2002). Therefore, the claimant's argument is without E. THE ALJ WAS CORRECT IN NOT USING THE "GRIDS" TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE ......
  • Nava v. Berryhill
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Middle District of Florida
    • 3 Enero 2019
    ...are supported by substantial evidence and whether the correct legal standards were applied. 42 U.S.C. § 405(g); Wilson v. Barnhart, 284 F.3d 1219, 1221 (11th Cir. 2002).III. Plaintiff argues that the ALJ erred by finding that Plaintiff had the RFC to perform medium work and determining that......
  • Woods v. Berryhill
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of Alabama
    • 11 Octubre 2018
    ...to show that the ALJ had considered Woods's medically determinable mental impairments at Step Three. See Wilson v. Barnhart, 284 F.3d 1219, 1224-25 (11th Cir. 2002) (per curiam). 12. The regulation's definition of "light work" itself imposes no mental limitations. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1567(b) ("......
  • Houston v. Colvin, CASE NO. 7:13-cv-00208-JEO
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Alabama
    • 14 Febrero 2014
    ...evidence to support the findings of the Commissioner, and whether the correct legal standards were applied." Wilson v. Barnhart, 284 F.3d 1219, 1221 (11th Cir. 2002); see also Lamb v. Bowen, 847 F.2d 698, 701 (11th Cir. 1988). The court gives deference to factual findings and reviews questi......
  • 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
    • 4 Mayo 2015
    ..., 493 F.3d 965 (8th Cir. July 19, 2007), 8th-07 Wilson v. Astrue , 602 F.3d 1136 (10th Cir. Feb. 17, 2010), 10th-10 Wilson v. Barnhart , 284 F.3d 1219 (11th Cir. Mar. 6, 2002), 11th-02 Wilson v. Chater , 76 F.3d 238, 241 (8th Cir. 1996), §§ 106.7, 202.2, 204.8, 205.6, 205.7, 205.8, 205.9, 2......
  • Case Index
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Bohr's Social Security Issues Annotated - Volume I
    • 4 Mayo 2015
    ...Sec. , 221 F.3d 828 (6th Cir. July, 2000), 6th-00 Turpin v. Colvin , 750 F.3d 989 (8th Cir. May 7, 2014), 8th-14 Wilson v. Barnhart , 284 F.3d 1219 (11th Cir. Mar. 6, 2002), 11th-02 § 101.6. Childhood Disability Insurance Benefits Moore v. Commissioner , 278 F.3d 920 (9th Cir. Jan. 24, 2002......
  • Case index
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Archive Social Security Issues Annotated. Vol. I - 2014 Preliminary Sections
    • 2 Agosto 2014
    ...th Cir. Sept. 25, 2000), 9 th -00 Salamalekis v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec. , 221 F.3d 828 (6 th Cir. July, 2000), 6 th -00 Wilson v. Barnhart, 284 F.3d 1219 (11 th Cir. Mar. 6, 2002), 11 th -02 § 101.6 Childhood Disability Insurance Benefits Moore v. Commissioner, 278 F.3d 920 (9 th Cir. Jan. 24,......
  • Table of cases
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Archive Social Security Issues Annotated. Vol. II - 2014 Contents
    • 3 Agosto 2014
    ..., 493 F.3d 965 (8th Cir. July 19, 2007), 8th-07 Wilson v. Astrue , 602 F.3d 1136 (10th Cir. Feb. 17, 2010), 10th-10 Wilson v. Barnhart , 284 F.3d 1219 (11th Cir. Mar. 6, 2002), 11th-02 Wilson v. Chater , 76 F.3d 238, 241 (8th Cir. 1996), §§ 106.7, 202.2, 204.8, 205.6, 205.7, 205.8, 205.9, 2......

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