Patty Swenson v. Shirley Chater ( 1996 )


Menu:
  •                                     ___________
    No. 95-3944
    ___________
    Patty Swenson,                            *
    *
    Appellant,                  *   Appeal from the United States
    *   District Court for the
    v.                                *   District of North Dakota.
    *
    Shirley S. Chater, Commissioner       *              [UNPUBLISHED]
    of Social Security,                       *
    *
    Appellee.                   *
    ___________
    Submitted:     July 17, 1996
    Filed:   July 26, 1996
    ___________
    Before BEAM, HANSEN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    Patty Swenson appeals from the final order entered in the district
    1
    court affirming the decision to deny her application for Social Security
    disability benefits and supplemental security income (SSI).          We affirm.
    Swenson was born in 1960, and worked as a trained medical aid, a
    nurse's aid, and a cook/dishwasher, among other things.        In September 1992,
    Swenson applied for benefits alleging disability due to severe pain in her
    right    leg.     Swenson's   application     was   denied   initially   and   upon
    reconsideration.    At a December 1993
    1
    The Honorable Rodney S. Webb, Chief Judge, United States
    District Court for the District of North Dakota, adopting the
    report and recommendation of the Honorable Karen K. Klein, United
    States Magistrate Judge for the District of North Dakota.
    hearing before an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ), Swenson, her husband, and
    a vocational expert testified.
    The ALJ found Swenson was not disabled.   The ALJ discounted Swenson's
    subjective complaints to the extent she alleged total disability, and
    concluded that Swenson's limitations did not prevent her from performing
    past relevant work.   The Appeals Council considered additional medical
    records submitted by Swenson, including a report stating a psychologist's
    opinion that Swenson's pain was genuine, but denied review.    The district
    court affirmed the denial of benefits, and Swenson appeals.
    Having reviewed the record, including the new evidence submitted to
    the Appeals Council, we conclude that substantial evidence on the record
    as a whole supports the ALJ's evaluation of Swenson's subjective complaints
    of pain under the standards set forth in Polaski v. Heckler, 
    739 F.2d 1320
    ,
    1322 (8th Cir. 1984), as well as the ALJ's decision that Swenson could
    perform her past relevant work.   See Baumgarten v. Chater, 
    75 F.3d 366
    , 368
    (8th Cir. 1996) (standard of review).
    Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is affirmed.
    A true copy.
    Attest:
    CLERK, U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 95-3944

Filed Date: 7/26/1996

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021