Nettles v. Sullivan

1 Citing case

  1. Guerrero v. Apfel

    69 F. Supp. 2d 1158 (N.D. Iowa 1999)

    The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has adopted the view of the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals that the "duration of impairment" requirement is that the impairment be disabling for a continuous twelve-month period; impairment for a continuous twelve-month period is not enough. See Titus v. Sullivan, 4 F.3d 590, 594-95 (8th Cir. 1993) (citing Alexander v. Richardson, 451 F.2d 1185, 1186 (10th Cir. 1971)); see also Nettles v. Sullivan, 956 F.2d 820, 823 (8th Cir. 1992) (a disability benefits claimant who missed work three or four days a month as a result of a painful back condition did not show inability to engage in substantial gainful activity for a period longer than twelve months as required to show disability under 42 U.S.C. ยง 423(d)(1)(A)). The ALJ, however, discussed all of the medical evidence, and concluded that Guerrero, although impaired, does not suffer from an impairment or combination of impairments sufficient to meet or equal the requirements for any listed impairment.