Owens

Owens v. Barnhart

Good Law
48 F. App'x 624
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 3, 2002No. 00-35998; D.C. No. CV-99-03081-KICalifornia667 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Carol A. Owens appeals the district court’s judgment affirming the Commissioner of Social Security’s (“Commissioner”) denial of disability insurance benefits under Title II and supplemental security income disability insurance benefits under Title XVI of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 401 et seq., 1381 et seq. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we reverse and remand.

We review de novo the district court’s order. Johnson v. Shalala, 60 F.3d 1428, 1432 (9th Cir.1995). The Commissioner’s denial of benefits may be overturned only if “it is not supported by substantial evidence, or ... is based on legal error.” Id.

We conclude that substantial evidence does not support the administrative law judge’s (“ALJ”) finding that Owens’ testimony was not credible. First, Owens’ application for unemployment benefits is not necessarily inconsistent with her claim of disability under the Social Security Act. 1 Substantial evidence also does not support the ALJ’s finding that Owens’ medication is not indicative of Owens’ limitations. Moreover, the ALJ’s observations at the hearing and Owens’ daily activities do not necessarily support a finding that she…

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.