Latest / FLG Disability Insights / When an SSDI Work-Capacity Finding Lacks the Functional Evidence
Transcript
- Medical findings can prove that a person has serious impairments. But can an administrative law judge translate those findings into an ability to perform medium work without evidence explaining what the person can functionally sustain? Welcome to FLG Disability Insights. I’m Nick Feden of Feden Law Group. In Griffin, the claimant applied for Social Security Disability Insurance in twenty twenty-three. The administrative law judge recognized severe hypertension, cardiomyopathy, and vision impairments, including blindness in the left eye. Even so, the judge found that the claimant could perform medium work with added restrictions for posture, vision, and workplace hazards. That finding supported a denial based on past work and other jobs. The federal court focused on the medical foundation for that work-capacity assessment. Both state-agency consultants had said the evidence was insufficient to assess residual functional capacity—the most a person can do despite limitations. Neither consultant identified specific work restrictions, and neither had reviewed the newest medical evidence. Those insufficiency findings did not affirmatively show that the claimant could meet medium-work demands. The court concluded that the judge had interpreted cardiac and eye findings without enough evidence connecting them to the selected functional limits. There was evidence cutting against the claim. The judge cited independent living, household chores, use of public transportation, and fishing for as long as twelve hours. Those activities were relevant and could not simply be ignored. But the federal court found that they did not close the central gap in the residual functional-capacity analysis. The court vacated the denial and sent the claim back for further proceedings. It did not award benefits, and it did not find that the claimant was disabled. The administrative law judge still decides residual functional capacity, and the claimant still bears the burden of proving disability. Griffin also does not say that every case must contain a physician’s opinion matching the final work-capacity finding. The practical question for a claimant reviewing a denial is precise: What evidence explains how the current medical condition affects the demands of sustained work? A thick medical file is not automatically a functional assessment. When the available evidence is inadequate, the decision also illustrates the judge’s responsibility to develop a full and fair record, even when the claimant has counsel. Visit FedenLawGroup dot com and try FLG Case Analyst Beta. Get a full report from our attorney-trained, cutting-edge AI model, then connect with our firm about your next step. This podcast provides general information, not legal advice, and listening does not create an attorney-client relationship. I’m Nick Feden. Thanks for listening to FLG Disability Insights.