Barbara Ray v. Kilolo Kijakazi ( 2021 )


Menu:
  •                  United States Court of Appeals
    For the Eighth Circuit
    ___________________________
    No. 21-1521
    ___________________________
    Barbara Ray
    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 Arkansas - El Dorado
    ____________
    Submitted: September 24, 2021
    Filed: September 29, 2021
    [Unpublished]
    ____________
    Before LOKEN, BENTON, 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).
    Barbara Ray 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
    Kraus v. Saul, 
    988 F.3d 1019
    , 1023-24 (8th Cir. 2021) (de novo review of district
    court’s judgment; this court will affirm unless Commissioner’s findings are not
    supported by substantial evidence). Specifically, we agree that the ALJ properly
    weighed the medical opinion evidence, see Miller v. Colvin, 
    784 F.3d 472
    , 478 (8th
    Cir. 2015) (ALJ was free to discount treating source’s opinion, as it was not well-
    supported by objective medical evidence and was inconsistent with other evidence
    in record); Lacroix v. Barnhart, 
    465 F.3d 881
    , 887 (8th Cir. 2006) (ALJ did not err
    in giving more weight to opinion of examining physician than to opinions of treating
    therapist, as ALJ found examiner’s opinion more consistent with medical evidence
    and claimant’s daily activities); and did not fail to fully develop the record, see
    Hensley v. Colvin, 
    829 F.3d 926
    , 932 (8th Cir. 2016) (there is no requirement that
    RFC finding be supported by specific medical opinion); Stormo v. Barnhart, 
    377 F.3d 801
    , 806 (8th Cir. 2004) (ALJ did not fail to fully develop record, as no crucial issue
    was undeveloped, and examining physicians provided clinical data and observations
    about claimant’s limitations). We decline to address Ray’s new arguments on appeal.
    See Gragg v. Astrue, 
    615 F.3d 932
    , 938 (8th Cir. 2010).
    The judgment is affirmed.
    ______________________________
    2
    The Honorable Barry A. Bryant, United States Magistrate Judge for the
    Western District of Arkansas, 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: 21-1521

Filed Date: 9/29/2021

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 9/29/2021