Swanson v. Colvin

19 Citing cases

  1. Angelica M. v. Saul

    CIVIL CASE NO. 3:20-CV-00727 (JCH) (D. Conn. Jul. 14, 2021)   Cited 26 times
    In Angelica M., Judge Hall noted that the sufficiency of the evidence will turn on the underlying medical records that address a claimant's work limitations.

    In practice, however, this standard is often not met in cases where there is no medical source statement. See, e.g., Cordova v. Saul, No. 19-CV-0628, 2020 WL 4435184, at *4-5 (D. Conn. Aug. 3, 2020) (noting that a medical source statement was “[a]bsent from the record, ” identifying “important gaps, ” and holding that “the record should have included a medical source statement”); Guillen v. Berryhill, 697 F. App'x. 107, 109 (remanding for failure to develop the record where the ALJ had failed to obtain a medical source statement from the claimant's treating physician, and “[t]he medical records discuss her illnesses and suggest treatment for them, but offer no insight into how her impairments affect or do not affect her ability to work”); Swanson v. Colvin, No. 12-CV-645-S, 2013 WL 5676028, at *5 (W.D.N.Y. Oct. 17, 2013) (“[a]bsent a reasonable explanation for the failure to obtain an RFC assessment from any treating source, the Court cannot conclude the ALJ fulfilled her affirmative duty to develop the record”). Simply having a medical source statement in the record is not, however, “dispositive.”

  2. Alamo v. Berryhill

    CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:18-CV-00210 (JCH) (D. Conn. Sep. 3, 2019)   Cited 11 times
    Finding that ALJ failed to develop the record by not obtaining treating physician opinion "notwithstanding" opinions by examining and non-examining consultants and further, that medical records and consulting opinions were insufficient to support "light work" determination

    Moreau v. Berryhill, No. 3:17-CV-00396 (JCH), 2018 WL 1316197, at *8; see also DeLeon v. Colvin, No. 3:15-CV-01106 (JCH), 2016 WL 3211419, at *4 (D. Conn. June 9, 2016) ("Records that are deemed to be complete without a medical source statement from a treating physician contain notes that express the treating physician's views as to the claimant's residual functional capacity, i.e., the treating physician's views can be divined from their notes, and it is only a formal statement of opinion that is missing from the Record."); La Torre v. Colvin, No. 14-CV-3615 (AJP), 2015 WL 321881, at *12 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 26, 2015) ("Unlike the ALJ in Tankisi. . . , ALJ Russak did not have even an informal assessment of La Torre's limitations on which to rely in making his determination."); Swanson v. Colvin, No. 12-CV-645S, 2013 WL 5676028, at *5 (W.D.N.Y. Oct. 17, 2013). Alamo's case is similarly distinguishable from Tankisi on this basis.

  3. Pratt v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.

    Case # 18-CV-6017-FPG (W.D.N.Y. May. 22, 2019)

    The treating physician rule "necessarily dovetails with" the question of whether there was sufficient evidence in the record for the ALJ to assess the claimant's RFC. See Swanson v. Colvin, No. 12-CV-645S, 2013 WL 5676028, at *5 (W.D.N.Y. Oct. 17, 2013). Indeed, "the opinion of a treating physician is an especially important part of the record to be developed by the ALJ."

  4. Daumen v. Berryhill

    Civil No. 1:17CV00514 (HBF) (W.D.N.Y. Dec. 5, 2018)   Cited 5 times
    Remanding case where A.L.J. failed to comply with the Appeals Council's specific instructions on initial remand

    As courts in our Circuit have previously observed, "'it is unreasonable to expect a physician to make, on his own accord, the detailed functional assessment demanded by the Act in support of a patient seeking SSI benefits.'" Swanson v. Colvin, No. 12-CV-645S, 2013 WL 5676028, at *5 (W.D.N.Y. Oct. 17, 2013)(quoting Ubiles v. Astrue, No. 11-CV-6340T(MAT), 2012 WL 2572772, at *9 (W.D.N.Y. July 2, 2012)). Here, the ALJ rejected Dr. Cieri's functional assessment addressing plaintiff's visual capabilities and took no further steps to contact the doctor as directed by the Appeals Council. Rather than develop the record, the ALJ rejected the doctor's opinion and concluded that the plaintiff had "mild optic atrophy."

  5. Gonzalez-Cruz v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.

    Case # 17-CV-6406-FPG (W.D.N.Y. Sep. 28, 2018)   Cited 2 times

    Halloran v. Barnhart, 362 F.3d 28, 33 (2d Cir. 2004) (per curiam); see also 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1527(c)(2), 416.927(c)(2) ("We will always give good reasons in our notice of determination or decision for the weight we give [the claimant's] treating source's opinion."). The treating physician rule "necessarily dovetails with" the question of whether there was sufficient evidence in the record for the ALJ to assess the claimant's RFC. See Swanson v. Colvin, No. 12-CV-645S, 2013 WL 5676028, at *5 (W.D.N.Y. Oct. 17, 2013). Indeed, "the opinion of a treating physician is an especially important part of the record to be developed by the ALJ."

  6. Rosado v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.

    17-CV-2035 (PKC) (E.D.N.Y. May. 16, 2018)   Cited 5 times

    The question of whether there is a fully developed record "dovetails with the 'treating physician rule.'" Swanson v. Colvin, 12-CV-645S, 2013 WL 5676028, at *5 (W.D.N.Y. Oct. 17, 2013) (quoting 20 C.F.R. § 404.1527(d)(2)). As courts in this Circuit have previously observed, "it is unreasonable to expect a physician to make, on his own accord, the detailed functional assessment demanded by the Act in support of a patient seeking SSI benefits."

  7. Delgado v. Berryhill

    CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:17-CV-54 (JCH) (D. Conn. Mar. 13, 2018)   Cited 60 times
    Holding that the case is "already being remanded for other reasons," and "because [the plaintiff's] RFC may change after full development of the record," the ALJ is likely to need to reconsider the other steps in the five-step analysis

    Because of this, a number of courts in this Circuit have remanded where the ALJ failed to obtain a medical opinion from any of the claimant's treating physicians. See, e.g., Hoehn v. Colvin, No. 14-CV-6401L, 2016 WL 241365, at *3 (W.D.N.Y. Jan. 21, 2016); Swanson v. Colvin, No. 12-CV-645S, 2013 WL 5676028, at *5 (W.D.N.Y. Oct. 17, 2013) ("Absent a reasonable explanation for the failure to obtain an RFC assessment from any treating source, the Court cannot conclude that the ALJ fulfilled her affirmative duty to develop the record. Accordingly, the matter is remanded."); Ayer v. Astrue, No. 2:11-CV-83, 2012 WL 381784, at *3 (D. Vt. Feb. 6, 2012) ("[T]he Court finds that remand is required, given the ALJ's failure to request medical opinions from any of Ayer's treating providers, . . . which resulted in a substantial gap in the record.").

  8. Moreau v. Berryhill

    CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:17-CV-00396 (JCH) (D. Conn. Mar. 13, 2018)   Cited 89 times

    Because of this, a number of courts in this Circuit have remanded where the ALJ failed to obtain a medical opinion from any of the claimant's treating physicians. See, e.g., Swanson v. Colvin, No. 12-CV-645S, 2013 WL 5676028, at *5 (W.D.N.Y. Oct. 17, 2013) ("Absent a reasonable explanation for the failure to obtain an RFC assessment from any treating source, the Court cannot conclude that the ALJ fulfilled her affirmative duty to develop the record. Accordingly, the matter is remanded."); Ayer v. Astrue, No. 2:11-CV-83, 2012 WL 381784, at *3 (D. Vt. Feb. 6, 2012) ("[T]he Court finds that remand is required, given the ALJ's failure to request medical opinions from any of Ayer's treating providers, . . . which resulted in a substantial gap in the record.").

  9. Nunez v. Berryhill

    16 Civ. 5078 (HBP) (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 11, 2017)   Cited 21 times
    Finding treating relationship where the doctor examined plaintiff three times over the course of three months, provided diagnoses, and prescribed medication

    " (alteration and emphasis in original)), quoting Peed v. Sullivan, 778 F. Supp. 1241, 1246 (E.D.N.Y. 1991); Downes v. Colvin, 14 Civ. 7147 (JLC), 2015 WL 4481088 at *10 (S.D.N.Y. July 22, 2015) (Cott, M.J.) ("Because [t]he expert opinions of a treating physician as to the existence of a disability are binding on the fact finder, it is not sufficient for the ALJ simply to secure raw data from the treating physician." (alteration in original; internal quotation marks omitted)); Sanchez v. Colvin, supra, 2015 WL 736102 at *6; Swanson v. Colvin, No. 12-CV-645S, 2013 WL 5676028 at *5 (W.D.N.Y. Oct. 17, 2013). Here, neither Dr. Wright nor Dr. Bachar assessed plaintiff's limitations and their treatment notes do not address them directly or by implication.

  10. Riley-Tull v. Berryhill

    Case # 16-CV-151-FPG (W.D.N.Y. Jun. 30, 2017)   Cited 1 times
    Remanding where the ALJ rejected the only medical opinions as to the claimant's physical capabilities and the record lacked any treating physician assessment as to the claimant's ability to work

    Here, remand is required because Drs. Pleskow and Fiorica did not provide any type of assessment as to Riley-Tull's ability to work. See, e.g., Swanson v. Colvin, No. 12-CV-645S, 2013 WL 5676028, at *5 (W.D.N.Y. Oct. 17, 2013) (distinguishing Tankisi and concluding that the ALJ failed to develop the record where it lacked a formal or informal RFC assessment by a treating source). Moreover, the ALJ rejected the opinion of Riley-Tull's former treating physician Dr. Mehta. Tr. 22 (citing Tr. 437-39).