Caron v. Chater ( 1997 )


Menu:
  • [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
    No. 97-1185
    JOANN CARON,
    Plaintiff, Appellant,
    v.
    SHIRLEY S. CHATER, COMMISSIONER,
    SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,
    Defendant, Appellee.
    APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
    FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
    [Hon. Frank H. Freedman, Senior U.S. District Judge]
    Before
    Selya, Boudin and Stahl,
    Circuit Judges.
    Francis Lafayette on brief for appellant.
    Donald  K.  Stern,  United  States  Attorney,  Karen  L.  Goodwin,
    Assistant  United   States  Attorney,  and  Sara   Gardiner  Kilkenny,
    Assistant Regional  Counsel, Social Security  Administration, on brief
    for appellee.
    September 3, 1997
    Per Curiam.   We have examined the  parties' briefs
    and  the record  on appeal.   Although  we have  considerable
    doubt  whether  the  district  court  had  jurisdiction,  the
    Commissioner's decision is adequately supported, so we see no
    need  to reach  the jurisdictional  issue in  this case.   We
    affirm the order  of the district  court, dated November  27,
    1996, essentially for the reasons given in the district court
    Memorandum  of  the  same  date.    We  would  add  only  the
    following.
    Claimant  argues   the  Administrative   Law  Judge
    ("ALJ")  improperly  used  "the Grid"  (20  C.F.R.  Part 404,
    Subpart P,  App. 2)  in  evaluating claimant's  nonexertional
    limitations.   This court has  noted use of "the  Grid" alone
    may  be  improper  in   some  cases  involving  nonexertional
    limitations.  Ortiz  v. Secretary of  Health & Human  Servs.,
    
    890 F.2d 520
    ,  524-24 (1st  Cir. 1989).   But  here the  ALJ
    followed  the rule  from Ortiz  by using  the testimony  of a
    vocational expert in addition to using "the Grid." 
    Id.
      Thus,
    the ALJ's use of "the Grid" was not improper.
    Claimant also argues the ALJ failed to evaluate her
    subjective  complaints  of  pain.    While  a  more  detailed
    analysis  of those complaints would have been preferable, see
    Frustaglia v.  Secretary of Health  & Human Servs.,  
    829 F.2d 192
    , 195 (1st Cir.  1987), we have examined the record and we
    -2-
    conclude  the ALJ had  ample support for  his conclusion that
    the claimant's subjective complaints were not credible.
    AFFIRMED.
    -3-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 97-1185

Filed Date: 9/9/1997

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021