Chadwick
Chadwick v. Massanari
Opinion
Lead Opinion
*711 MEMORANDUM **
Gerald Chadwick appeals the district court’s order affirming the Commissioner’s denial of his application for Social Security-Disability Insurance Benefits. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U .S.C. § 1291, and we reverse and remand for further proceedings.
We review a district court’s decision upholding the Commissioner’s denial of benefits de novo. Harman v. Apfel, 211 F.3d 1172, 1174 (9th Cir.2000). The decision of the Commissioner must be affirmed if it is supported by substantial evidence and the Commissioner applied the correct legal standards. Tackett v. Apfel, 180 F.3d 1094,1097 (9th Cir.1999).
Where, as in this case, medical evidence establishes “an objective basis for some degree of pain and related symptoms” and there is “no evidence affirmatively suggesting that the claimant was malingering,” the Commissioner must give “clear and convincing" reasons supported by specific findings for rejecting the claimant’s pain testimony. Dodrill v. Shalala, 12 F.3d 915, 918 (9th Cir.1993). This standard applies to all “subjective symptom” testimony by the claimant, not just to pain testimony. Smolen v. Chater, 80 F.3d 1273, 1281 (9th Cir.1996). Furthermore,…