Roldan v. Barnhart
This text of 61 F. App'x 727 (Roldan v. Barnhart) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the First Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
After carefully reviewing the briefs and record on appeal, we affirm substantially for the reasons stated by the district court.
The appellant argues that the administrative law judge ignored material evidence and substituted his judgment for *728 expert medical opinion. However, substantial evidence supported the determination that the claimant would not have been disabled if he had not been drinking. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1535(b). The record contains ample evidence linking the claimant’s symptoms to ongoing alcohol abuse, in addition to liver disease. Ortiz v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 955 F.2d 765, 769 (1st Cir.1991).
Affirmed. Loe. R. 27(c).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
61 F. App'x 727, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/roldan-v-barnhart-ca1-2003.