Maniaci

Maniaci v. Barnhart

Good Law
64 F. App'x 653
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 23, 2003No. 01-56919California324 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

The ALJ did not err in considering the degree of Lee Maniaci’s hand limitations in determining that she was not disabled or precluded from light work prior to her last insured date of September 30, 1986. In rejecting the opinion of Maniaci’s treating physician, Dr. Ernstoff, on Maniaci’s hand limitations, the ALJ pointed out that an EMG, nerve conduction studies, and a neurological examination conducted by Dr. Ernstoff prior to 1986 were normal except for “borderline prolongation of latency for the median sensory bilaterally suggestive of early carpal tunnel syndrome.” The ALJ also properly considered the combined effect of Maniaci’s cervical spine problems and her carpal tunnel syndrome in evaluating her hand restrictions and residual functional capacity, reviewing in detail records of Maniaci’s orthopedic and neurological examinations, spinal x-rays, pain symptoms, and daily activities. The ALJ noted that x-rays taken by Dr. Ernstoff showed only mild degenerative changes in the cervical spine and that the doctor reported Maniaci’s hand conditions had significantly improved after wearing splints. The ALJ also considered the testimony of other doctors who had found…

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.