A large part of the ALJ’s decision was based on a purported
internal inconsistency in the doctor’s opinion.
But the court found that the doctor had made “nothing more than a simple
mistake” in filling out a questionnaire.
Citing Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals precedent, the court
found that: “Where an ALJ provides
legally insufficient reasons for rejecting medical opinion, that opinion is
treated as true.” Harmen
v. Apfel, 211 F.3d 1172, 1179 (9th Cir. 2000). In this case, the doctor’s
opinion established disability.
The court held that there were no further factual issues to
be resolved and remanded the case for an award of benefits.
COMMENT
This decision was based on Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals
precedent. See the article below, just
above the copyright line, regarding precedent.
Here the court upheld the treating physician rule.
http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=12893778172930106194&q=social+security&hl=en&as_sdt=40000003&as_ylo=2014
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thank you for your comment. Comments may be edited. Only general interest comments will be posted. Please do not include personally identifiable information about anyone's actual Social Security case in your comments.