Sorensen

Sorensen v. Barnhart

Good Law
69 F. App'x 864
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 26, 2003No. 02-35382; D.C. No. CV-00-01134-BJRCalifornia1,400 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Plaintiff-Appellant Scott E. Sorensen appeals from the district court’s affirmance of the Social Security Administration’s (“SSA”) denial of his application for Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”) disability benefits. The members of Sorensen’s treatment team, including two M.D.s and a licensed therapist, all concluded that his depression, bipolar illness, and affective disorder left him unable to work. However, the four non-treating physicians who examined Sorensen only in connection with his applications for benefits all concluded otherwise. The ALJ credited the testimony of the examining physicians and rejected the testimony and documentary evidence of both Sorensen, himself, and his treatment team, concluding that they were not credible. The district court affirmed the ALJ’s decision. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we reverse.

“An ALJ may rely on the medical opinion of a non-treating doctor instead of the contrary opinion of a treating doctor only if she or he provides ‘specific and legitimate’ reasons supported by substantial evidence in the record.” Holohan v. Massanari, 246 F.3d 1195, 1202 (9th Cir. 2001) (citing Lester v. Chater, 81 F.3d…

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.