Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Crystal Mae MOORE Plaintiff - Appellant v. Andrew SAUL, Commissioner, Social Security Administration Defendant - Appellee
[Unpublished]
Crystal Moore appeals the district court's 1 order affirming the denial of disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income. After consideration of Moore's arguments for reversal, we agree with the court that substantial evidence in the record as a whole supports the adverse decision. See Nash v. Comm'r, Soc. Sec. Admin., 907 F.3d 1086, 1089 (8th Cir. 2018) (de novo review of district court's judgment; Commissioner's decision will be upheld if it is supported by substantial evidence in record as whole). Specifically, we find that the administrative law judge (ALJ) adequately considered the combined effects of Moore's impairments, see Martise v. Astrue, 641 F.3d 909, 924 (8th Cir. 2011) (ALJ properly considered combined effects of claimant's impairments by expressly finding that she did not have “impairment or combination of impairments” that satisfied listings, and discussing medical evidence regarding each of her impairments); and cited proper reasons in finding her subjective complaints not fully consistent with the overall record, see Swink v. Saul, 931 F.3d 765, 771 (8th Cir. 2019) (ALJ's credibility determination, which analyzed objective findings on examination, diagnostic imaging results, and claimant's daily activities, was supported by substantial evidence). We find that the hypothetical questions posed to the vocational expert were not deficient, as Moore's argument for greater limitations relies largely on her subjective reports, which the ALJ properly discounted. See Schwandt v. Berryhill, 926 F.3d 1004, 1013 (8th Cir. 2019) (substantial evidence supported ALJ's omission of additional limitations from claimant's residual functional capacity, as those limitations were based on claimant's testimony and were undermined by other evidence of record).
The judgment is affirmed.
FOOTNOTES
1. The Honorable John M. Bodenhausen, United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).
PER CURIAM.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 19-2675
Decided: May 22, 2020
Court: United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)