Christina Eaton v. Kilolo Kijakazi ( 2021 )


Menu:
  •                  United States Court of Appeals
    For the Eighth Circuit
    ___________________________
    No. 20-2932
    ___________________________
    Christina L. Eaton
    lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant
    v.
    Kilolo Kijakazi,1 Acting Commissioner of Social Security Administration
    lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellee
    ____________
    Appeal from United States District Court
    for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City
    ____________
    Submitted: July 20, 2021
    Filed: July 23, 2021
    [Unpublished]
    ____________
    Before COLLOTON, GRUENDER, and KOBES, Circuit Judges.
    ____________
    PER CURIAM.
    1
    Kilolo Kijakazi has been appointed to serve as Acting Commissioner of Social
    Security, and is substituted as appellee pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate
    Procedure 43(c).
    Christina Eaton appeals the district court’s2 order affirming the denial of
    disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income. We agree with the
    court that substantial evidence in the record as a whole supports the adverse decision.
    See Twyford v. Comm’r, Soc. Sec. Admin., 
    929 F.3d 512
    , 516 (8th Cir. 2019) (de
    novo review of district court’s judgment; this court will affirm unless Commissioner’s
    findings are unsupported by substantial evidence or result from legal error).
    Specifically, we conclude the record supports the administrative law judge’s (ALJ’s)
    finding that Eaton’s impairments did not meet the mental disorder listings, see 
    id. at 517
     (ALJ’s finding that listing was not met was supported by treatment notes and
    claimant’s daily activities); and the ALJ’s determination of Eaton’s residual
    functional capacity (RFC), see Wildman v. Astrue, 
    596 F.3d 959
    , 969 (8th Cir. 2010)
    (ALJ did not err in failing to include limitation in RFC, as he determined that
    claimant’s allegations about such limitation were not credible). We find no merit to
    Eaton’s argument that the ALJ erred by failing to recontact the medical expert after
    the hearing. See Onstad v. Shalala, 
    999 F.2d 1232
    , 1234 (8th Cir. 1993) (reversal due
    to failure to develop record is only warranted where such failure is unfair or
    prejudicial; no prejudice where claimant did not show that evidence ALJ failed to
    obtain would have made difference in case).
    The judgment is affirmed.
    ______________________________
    2
    The Honorable John T. Maughmer, United States Magistrate Judge for the
    Western District of Missouri, 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: 20-2932

Filed Date: 7/23/2021

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 7/23/2021