This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Government
Social Security Administration

Kathleen S. v. Andrew M. Saul

Published: Aug. 7, 2020 | Result Date: Jun. 2, 2020 | Filing Date: Apr. 8, 2019 |

Case number: 3:19-cv-00651-JLS-RNB Summary Judgment –  Plaintiff

Judge

Janis L. Sammartino

Court

USDC Southern District of California


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Matty M. Sandoval
(Law Office of Matty M. Sandoval)

David F. Chermol
(Chermol & Fishman LLC)


Defendant

Katherine L. Parker
(Office of the U.S. Attorney)

Sharon Lahey
(Social Security Administration)


Facts

Plaintiff A.Y.V sought review of the Commissioner of the Social Security's decision denying Plaintiff's application for Supplemental Security Income.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: Plaintiff alleged she was severely impaired from severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, hearing loss, residuals of a fractured right foot that contained cysts, a cyst on the liver, and obesity. Plaintiff contended Defendant erred when it determined Plaintiff was not disabled and when Defendant failed to consider Plaintiff's mild impairments, which included Plaintiff's mild mental limitations. Plaintiff contended Defendant failed to develop the record with regard to Plaintiff's hearing loss and failed to follow up on Plaintiff's limitations in the medical record for Plaintiff's obesity. Lastly, Plaintiff contended Defendant failed to recognize Plaintiff's right arm Lymphedema as medically severe and thus improperly considered Plaintiff's overall functioning capacity.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS: Defendant denied Plaintiff's contentions, and contended Plaintiff's application was denied because Plaintiff maintained sufficient functioning residual capacity to where Plaintiff could have performed light work. Defendant contended Plaintiff was not disabled through the last date insured and could have performed work as a waitress, such as Plaintiff had previously done.

Result

The court granted Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment after it concluded Defendant failed to properly develop the record with regard to Plaintiff's reported impairments.


#135138

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390