Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

10-2654 McKinzey v. Astrue

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//June 3, 2011//

10-2654 McKinzey v. Astrue

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//June 3, 2011//

Listen to this article

Public Health
Disability benefits

Where a disability claimant’s treating physician opined that she was exaggerating her symptoms and limitations, the ALJ’s denial of benefits is affirmed.

“[W]hat McKinzey’s account of the credibility determination leaves out is the final reason given by the ALJ, namely that, ‘[i]n addition, the record includes evidence strongly suggesting that claimant has exaggerated symptoms and limitations.’ This statement was supported by reference to Dr. Pardubsky’s 2007 medical opinion, which in this case could be labeled a smoking gun: ‘Objective findings at this time do not correlate with [McKinzey’s] ongoing subjective complaints.’ And—more damning for McKinzey’s credibility—‘she complains of an intermittent tremor that appears to be voluntarily present when she discussed exam of her hands but is absent at rest.’ In other words, in the opinion of her own treating specialist, McKinzey’s claimed symptoms were contradicted by his clinical evaluation.”

“In light of the substantial evidence that McKinzey was exaggerating her symptoms even to a treating physician, we conclude that the ALJ’s credibility determination was adequately supported by evidence in the record.”

Affirmed.

10-2654 McKinzey v. Astrue

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of Illinois, McDade, J., Manion, J.

Full Text

Polls

Should Steven Avery be granted a new evidentiary hearing?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests