Joe Martinez v. Carolyn W. Colvin

Good Law
585 F. App'x 612
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 30, 201412-57084California555 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Joe Martinez (“Martinez”) appeals the district court judgment affirming the decision of the Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) to deny Martinez’s application for social security disability and supplemental security income. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we reverse the judgment of the district court and remand for payment of benefits.

First, the ALJ did not set forth specific, legitimate reasons based on substantial evidence in the record for rejecting the assessment of examining physician Dr. Valerie K. Novak in favor of non-examining physician Dr. S. Brodsky’s opinion. See Bayliss v. Barnhart, 427 F.3d 1211, 1216 (9th Cir.2005) (citation omitted); Lester v. Chater, 81 F.3d 821, 831 (9th Cir.1995) (“The opinion of a nonexamining physician cannot by itself constitute substantial evidence that justifies the rejection of the opinion of either an examining physician or a treating physician.”). Moreover, relying on Dr. Brodsky’s opinion was also in error because Dr. Brodsky’s opinion was based on Dr. Novak’s findings, and a physician’s opinion is not substantial evidence if the opinion relies entirely on another doctor’s findings, but simply comes to…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.