Debbie L. Peace v. Larry G. Massanari , 26 F. App'x 598 ( 2002 )


Menu:
  •                    United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    ___________
    No. 01-2960
    ___________
    Debbie L. Peace,                     *
    *
    Appellant,               *
    * Appeal from the United States
    v.                             * District Court for the Western
    * District of Missouri.
    1
    JoAnne B. Barnhart, Commissioner,    *
    Social Security Administration,      *        [UNPUBLISHED]
    *
    *
    Appellee.                *
    ___________
    Submitted: January 4, 2002
    Filed: January 18, 2002
    ___________
    Before McMILLIAN, MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, and BYE, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    1
    JoAnne B. Barnhart has been appointed to serve as Commissioner of Social
    Security, and is substituted as appellee pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate
    Procedure 43(c)(2).
    Debbie L. Peace appeals the district court’s2 order affirming the denial of
    disability insurance benefits. In her June 1997 application, Ms. Peace alleged
    disability since August 1996 from severe nerve pain, headaches, and numbness and
    tingling in her left hand and arm; she later added muscle spasms in her back. After
    an administrative hearing, in May 1999 the administrative law judge (ALJ) found that
    Ms. Peace could perform certain jobs identified by the vocational expert (VE) in
    response to a hypothetical the ALJ posed, and thus that she was not disabled.
    Ms. Peace submitted additional records to the Appeals Council, including records of
    a January 2000 neck surgery, but the Appeals Council declined review. Having
    reviewed the record, including the records considered by the Appeals Council, we
    conclude there is substantial evidence to support the ALJ’s decision. See Barnes v.
    Soc. Sec. Admin., 
    171 F.3d 1181
    , 1183 (8th Cir. 1999) (per curiam) (standard of
    review).
    Ms. Peace first argues she met the requirements of Listing 1.05C, and the ALJ
    and the district court failed to show that following her doctors’ recommendations
    would have restored her ability to work. We disagree. Ms. Peace did not meet the
    listing-level requirements, as the record shows only minor or mild changes in her
    neck range of motion, muscle strength, and deep-tendon reflexes, so whether she
    complied with prescribed therapy is not determinative. See 20 C.F.R. Part 404,
    Subpt. P, App. 1, § 1.05C (2001) (listing requirements for other vertebrogenic
    disorders).
    Ms. Peace next contends that the ALJ’s credibility analysis did not comply with
    Polaski v. Heckler, 
    739 F.2d 1320
    , 1322 (8th Cir. 1984), and that the ALJ
    mischaracterized some of the evidence upon which he relied to discredit her. The
    alleged mischaracterizations she notes, however, do not negate the ALJ’s
    2
    The Honorable Ortrie D. Smith, United States District Judge for the Western
    District of Missouri.
    -2-
    determination that her subjective complaints of pain did not preclude all work, see
    Gowell v. Apfel, 
    242 F.3d 793
    , 796 (8th Cir. 2001) (there is no doubt claimant is
    experiencing pain, but real issue is how severe that pain is); and contrary to her
    assertion, a sporadic work history is relevant to a credibility analysis, see Woolf v.
    Shalala, 
    3 F.3d 1210
    , 1214 (8th Cir. 1993). Further, the January 2000 surgical
    records she submitted do not establish that her neck problems were disabling before
    her date last insured (March 1998). Finally, although we question the ALJ’s reliance
    on Ms. Peace’s reportedly limited daily activities to discredit her, see Haggard v.
    Apfel, 
    175 F.3d 591
    , 594 (8th Cir. 1999) (claimant need not be totally bedridden to
    be disabled), the other inconsistencies the ALJ listed were sufficient to support his
    credibility decision, see 
    id. (reviewing court
    will not disturb decision of ALJ who
    considers, but for good cause expressly discredits, claimant’s subjective complaints).
    Ms. Peace asserts that the ALJ failed to develop the record by requesting a
    psychiatric evaluation. This argument also fails. She did not claim a disabling
    mental impairment in her application, her reconsideration disability report, or her
    hearing request; and her treating physician did not diagnose situational depression
    until after her date last insured. Thus, a consultative mental examination was not
    required. See Haley v. Massanari, 
    258 F.3d 742
    , 749-50 (8th Cir. 2001) (it is
    permissible for ALJ to issue decision without obtaining added medical evidence, so
    long as other evidence provides sufficient basis for ALJ’s decision).
    Finally, Ms. Peace argues that the ALJ’s hypothetical to the VE was
    incomplete. However, the ALJ was not required to adopt the added limitations noted
    by a Social Security Administration reviewing physician, cf. Pierce v. Apfel, 
    173 F.3d 704
    , 707 (8th Cir. 1999) (government does not have to live with expert’s conclusions
    simply because government hired expert to evaluate claimant); and because the ALJ
    properly discounted Ms. Peace’s subjective mental complaints, excluding them from
    the hypothetical was proper, see Hunt v. Massanari, 
    250 F.3d 622
    , 625 (8th Cir. 2001)
    -3-
    (hypothetical is sufficient if it sets forth impairments supported by substantial
    evidence and accepted as true by ALJ).
    Accordingly, we affirm.
    A true copy.
    Attest:
    CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
    -4-