Robbie Robertson v. Margaret O. Heckler , Secretary of Health and Human Services

Ninth Circuit

Robbie Robertson v. Margaret O. Heckler , Secretary of Health and Human Services

716 F.2d 1284, 2 Soc. Serv. Rev. 538

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedSeptember 27, 1983

Docket82-3559

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 716 F.2d 1284 (Robbie Robertson v. Margaret O. Heckler , Secretary of Health and Human Services) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Robbie Robertson v. Margaret O. Heckler , Secretary of Health and Human Services, 716 F.2d 1284, 2 Soc. Serv. Rev. 538 (9th Cir. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Robbie Robertson appeals the judgment of the district court affirming the decision of an administrative law judge to deny *1285 Robertson disability benefits under the Federal Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 416(i), 423 (1976).

Robertson argues that the administrative law judge’s determination of his “residual functional capacity” was not supported by substantial evidence, that the “grid” system used to determine whether he was disabled is unconstitutional, and that Ninth Circuit law requires the administrative law judge to state specific job alternatives for the claimant rather than simply relying on the grids, as the administrative law judge did here.

Considering Robertson’s age, education, and prior work experience, the administrative law judge applied the Medical-Vocational Guidelines, 20 C.F.R. 404 Subpart P, Appendix 2. While there may have been some doubt, prior to May 16, 1983, about the administrative law judge’s use of the guidelines instead of making specific findings concerning work that the claimant could perform, those doubts have now been resolved in favor of the Secretary. Heckler v. Campbell,-U.S.-, 103 S.Ct. 1952, 76 L.Ed.2d 66 (1983).

The sufficiency of evidence point is also covered by the Campbell decision which approved the Secretary’s use of guidelines. In this case, the medical evidence, as well as other evidence, tended to support a finding that Robertson could perform light, sedentary work for three to five hours at a time. These findings placed him within the group of partially disabled workers who can perform some substantial gainful activity.

The judgment is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM:

Robbie Robertson appeals the judgment of the district court affirming the decision of an administrative law judge to deny *1285 Robertson disability benefits under the Federal Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 416(i), 423 (1976).

Robertson argues that the administrative law judge’s determination of his “residual functional capacity” was not supported by substantial evidence, that the “grid” system used to determine whether he was disabled is unconstitutional, and that Ninth Circuit law requires the administrative law judge to state specific job alternatives for the claimant rather than simply relying on the grids, as the administrative law judge did here.

Considering Robertson’s age, education, and prior work experience, the administrative law judge applied the Medical-Vocational Guidelines, 20 C.F.R. 404 Subpart P, Appendix 2. While there may have been some doubt, prior to May 16, 1983, about the administrative law judge’s use of the guidelines instead of making specific findings concerning work that the claimant could perform, those doubts have now been resolved in favor of the Secretary. Heckler v. Campbell,-U.S.-, 103 S.Ct. 1952, 76 L.Ed.2d 66 (1983).

The sufficiency of evidence point is also covered by the Campbell decision which approved the Secretary’s use of guidelines. In this case, the medical evidence, as well as other evidence, tended to support a finding that Robertson could perform light, sedentary work for three to five hours at a time. These findings placed him within the group of partially disabled workers who can perform some substantial gainful activity.

The judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

716 F.2d 1284, 2 Soc. Serv. Rev. 538, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robbie-robertson-v-margaret-o-heckler-secretary-of-health-and-human-ca9-1983.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack