Sheila A. Fowler v. Carolyn W. Colvin , 600 F. App'x 496 ( 2015 )


Menu:
  •               United States Court of Appeals
    For the Eighth Circuit
    ___________________________
    No. 14-2503
    ___________________________
    Sheila A. Fowler
    lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant
    v.
    Carolyn W. Colvin, Acting Commissioner of Social Security
    lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellee
    ____________
    Appeal from United States District Court
    for the District of North Dakota - Fargo
    ____________
    Submitted: April 7, 2015
    Filed: April 23, 2015
    [Unpublished]
    ____________
    Before LOKEN, BOWMAN, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.
    ____________
    PER CURIAM.
    Sheila Fowler appeals the district court’s1 order affirming the Commissioner’s
    denial of disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income. For
    reversal, Fowler argues that the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) erred in his
    determination, because (1) the ALJ “substituted” his opinion for that of Fowler’s
    treating physician and the agency’s medical expert when he concluded Fowler’s
    substance use was a contributing factor material to a finding of disability; and (2) the
    ALJ’s residual function capacity (RFC) determination was not adequately supported
    and the hypothetical posed to the vocational expert (VE) was flawed, because both
    failed to take into account the medical expert’s opinions and Fowler’s neck and back
    pain. Following careful review of the parties’ submissions and the record before us,
    we conclude that substantial evidence in the record as a whole supports the ALJ’s
    disability determination. See Myers v. Colvin, 
    721 F.3d 521
    , 524 (8th Cir. 2013)
    (standard of review); Kluesner v. Astrue, 
    607 F.3d 533
    , 537-38 (8th Cir. 2010)
    (claimant has burden to prove substance addiction is not contributing factor); Goff
    v. Barnhart, 
    421 F.3d 785
    , 793-94 (8th Cir. 2005) (RFC assessment based on all
    relevant, credible evidence; hypothetical posed to VE sufficient if sets forth
    impairments supported by substantial record evidence and accepted as true).
    Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
    ______________________________
    1
    The Honorable Karen K. Klein, United States Magistrate Judge for the District
    of North Dakota, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by consent of
    the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 14-2503

Citation Numbers: 600 F. App'x 496

Judges: Bowman, Kelly, Loken, Per Curiam

Filed Date: 4/23/2015

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/6/2024