Gerhardt List v. Kenneth S. Apfel

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedMarch 5, 1999
Docket98-2463
StatusPublished

This text of Gerhardt List v. Kenneth S. Apfel (Gerhardt List v. Kenneth S. Apfel) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Gerhardt List v. Kenneth S. Apfel, (8th Cir. 1999).

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 98-2463 ___________

Gerhardt List, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Western District of Missouri. Kenneth S. Apfel, Commissioner, * Social Security Administration, * * Appellee. *

Submitted: December 18, 1998

Filed: March 5, 1999 ___________

Before WOLLMAN, BEAM, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges. ___________

WOLLMAN, Circuit Judge.

Gerhardt List appeals from the district court’s judgment affirming the denial of his claim for disability benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 401 et seq. (Title II). We reverse and remand for further proceedings. I.

List, born on November 3, 1948, holds a college degree in chemistry. His past relevant work activity is that of a waste-water treatment chemist. List contracted polio in 1953. He was repeatedly hospitalized in 1955 for complications related to the disease. He spent nearly one month connected to a respirator and underwent spinal fusion to repair severe scoliosis. List left his employment in January of 1989 because of difficulty in breathing, back pain, ankle pain, and shaking and numbness in his fingers.

From January 1989 to December 1991, List did not consult a physician. He testified that he did not realize that his condition would worsen, did not know that he could be helped, and assumed that he would improve with rest. List was diagnosed in 1992 as suffering from postpoliomyelitis, or “post-polio syndrome.”1

List’s insured period expired on December 31, 1991. He applied for disability benefits on December 19, 1991, alleging that he was unable to work due to “polio, (a) back condition,” a “stomach condition,” and a left leg that was “thinner and shorter” than the right leg. The Social Security Administration denied List’s application initially and again on reconsideration. Following a hearing, an administrative law judge (ALJ) denied his claim, finding that List retained sufficient functional capacity to perform sedentary jobs available within his geographic region. The Appeals Council declined review, and the district court thereafter affirmed the Commissioner’s decision.

1 This condition is “characterized by muscle fatigue and decreased endurance, often accompanied by weakness, fasciculations, and atrophy in selective muscles. The syndrome occurs many years after an attack of paralytic poliomyelitis, affecting especially older and initially more severely involved patients.” The Merck Manual 2183 (16th ed. 1992).

-2- II.

To support the award of disability benefits, a disease must have progressed from latency to a level constituting severe impairment as defined under Title II before the expiration of the insured period. See McClain v. Bowen, 848 F.2d 892, 894 (8th Cir. 1988). Retrospective medical diagnoses constitute relevant evidence concerning the degree of disability prior to expiration of the insured period. See Jones v. Chater, 65 F.3d 102, 104 (8th Cir. 1995). “Where the impairment onset date is critical, however, retrospective medical opinions alone will usually not suffice unless the claimed onset date is corroborated, as by subjective evidence from lay observers like family members.” Id.

Although List did not present any third-party testimony corroborating the onset of post-polio syndrome prior to December 31, 1991, we conclude that in light of the unique debilitation that characterizes postpoliomyelitis List’s is one of those unusual cases in which testimony from lay observers is not required.

List presented medical records showing that he underwent a tracheostomy on September 29, 1994, to relieve the severe respiratory problems he was experiencing, and that he had been diagnosed as disabled with a severe respiratory deficiency in 1995. Indeed, List’s doctor reported on March 30, 1995, that List suffered from chronic pulmonary insufficiency as defined in 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpt. P, Appx. 1 § 3.02A. List also presented a residual functional capacity assessment which showed that he had more limited physical abilities in 1995 than was reported in 1992.

To discount the 1994 and 1995 medical records and reports that List submitted to support his claim, the ALJ wrote “there is nothing in the many Exhibits reflecting medical treatment provided later to the Claimant that is useful in determining whether the Claimant was ‘disabled’ while he was insured.” The ALJ noted that List was

-3- experiencing continuing numbness in his hands in 1994, but that List had admitted that the condition had only existed for approximately four months.

In denying List’s claim, the ALJ found that:

3. The record establishes the existence of medically determinable severe impairments prior to December 31, 1991, namely the residuals of poliomyelitis including atrophy of the right upper extremity; a tremor of the right upper extremity, atrophy and weakness of the left lower extremity, and pain and limited range of motion in the lumbosacral spine.

4. While his impairments, either singly or collectively, did not reveal the same or equivalent attendant medical findings as are recited in Appendix 1 to Subpart P of the Social Security Regulations No. 4, they imposed significant exertional and non-exertional limitations upon his ability to function prior to December 31, 1991.

Although the ALJ found that List’s impairment did not qualify as a listed disability under Subpart P, § 3.04 for chronic pulmonary insufficiency, the ALJ recognized that List was suffering from postpoliomyelitis during the insured period. The ALJ did not discuss, however, whether List qualified under the anterior poliomyelitis entry of listed impairments. See 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpt. P, Appx. 1 § 11.11. For List to qualify under section 11.11 of Appendix 1, one of three conditions must be met: he must exhibit (1) persistent difficulty with swallowing or breathing, (2) unintelligible speech, or (3) disorganization of motor function as described in section 11.04B of Subpt. P, Appx. 1.

In Barron v. Sullivan, 924 F.2d 227, 229 (11th Cir. 1991), the Eleventh Circuit noted that the Program Operations Manual System (POMS) guidelines concerning post-polio syndrome are useful in considering when unique situations are present in post-polio cases and in determining whether a claimant meets the listing for anterior

-4- poliomyelitis. Likewise, we believe that the ALJ should have considered the POMS guidelines in this case in light of the undisputed evidence regarding the respiratory and muscular problems that List experienced after December 31, 1991.

“The assessment of impairment depends on the degree of interference with locomotion and/or interference with the use of fingers, hands, and arms.” Barron, 924 F.2d at 229 (quoting 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpt. P, Appx. 1 § 11.00C). The ALJ did not determine the degree of impairment in each of List’s limbs.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Gerhardt List v. Kenneth S. Apfel, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gerhardt-list-v-kenneth-s-apfel-ca8-1999.