By: Derek Hawkins//December 8, 2015//
7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Case No.: 15-1230
Case Name: Anne Hill v. Carolyn Colvin
Officials: WOOD, Chief Judge, and POSNER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.
Practice Area: Social Security – Disability Insurance Benefits – Credibility
Administrative law judges’ credibility analysis flawed for relying on worthless expert testimony
“The administrative law judge found that the applicant has “severe impairments” consisting of “degenerative joint disease with total replacement of the left hip and osteoarthritis of the left shoulder.” (She has many subsidiary impairments as well, mainly on her left side like the severe impairments.) It seems ridiculous to think she can stand or walk for six hours in an eight‐hour workday or “balance” (whatever that means), or do full‐time work that even “occasionally” involves stooping, kneeling, crouching, crawling, or climbing ramps (depending on the angle—try climbing a ramp that is inclined by 45 degrees). Given the impairments of her left extremities (arm and leg) it is doubtful that she can pull, push, or reach with them; at least this issue central to her application required reasoned analysis, not an unexplained conclusion (though I acknowledge the severe time pressures under which the Social Security Administration’s administrative law judges labor). Nor was there any reason for the administrative law judge to say that the applicant can’t hold down a job that involves climbing ropes, as that is beyond obvious (and what kind of jobs in today’s economy involve climbing ropes?).”
Reversed and Remanded