Mills v. Astrue

2 Citing cases

  1. Simpson v. Colvin

    Civil Action Number 2:14-cv-00946-AKK (N.D. Ala. Jan. 12, 2015)   Cited 11 times
    Finding that the ALJ's failure to weigh an opinion that predated the alleged onset date by two-and-a-half years was not harmless because finding that the error was harmless would have required the court to reweigh the evidence

    "[W]hen an incorrect application of the regulations results in harmless error because the correct application would not contradict the ALJ's ultimate findings, the ALJ's decision will stand." Mills v. Astrue, 226 F. App'x 926, 931 (11th Cir. 2007) (citing Diorio v. Heckler, 721 F.2d 726, 728 (11th Cir. 1983)). First, Dr. Morgan's opinion, which was dated December 7, 2008, (R. 232), predates Simpson's onset date by two-and-a-half years, (R. 110). "Medical opinions that predate the alleged onset of disability are of limited relevance."

  2. Fain v. Colvin

    Civil Action Number 4:14-cv-00787-AKK (N.D. Ala. Dec. 23, 2014)   Cited 1 times
    Recognizing that the "accept as true" doctrine is not good law in the Eleventh Circuit

    Moreover, the court cannot say the ALJ's failure to consider Dr. Colvin's opinion was harmless. See Mills v. Astrue, 226 F. App'x 926, 931 (11th Cir. 2007) (citing Diorio v. Heckler, 721 F.2d 726, 728 (11th Cir. 1983)) ("[W]hen an incorrect application of the regulations results in harmless error because the correct application would not contradict the ALJ's ultimate findings, the ALJ's decision will stand."). While the ALJ was free to afford no weight to Dr. Colvin's opinion, he also could have found the opinion of Fain's long-time treating physician persuasive.