Franco

Franco v. Barnhart

Good Law
107 F. App'x 21
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 20, 2004No. 03-55026California747 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Marisa Franco challenges the district court’s affirmation of the Social Security Administration Appeals Council’s (“the Council's”) denial of her social security disability benefits from the period of December 20, 1994, to January 31, 1997. We conclude that Franco was disabled for part of that period and therefore affirm in part and reverse in part. Because the facts are familiar to the parties, we do not recite them here except as necessary.

The Administrative Law Judge’s (“ALJ’s”) and Council’s denial of disability benefits from January 5, 1996, to January *23 31, 1997, was based on legal error and was not supported by substantial evidence in the record. 1 The ALJ and Council failed to substantiate their implicit rejection of Dr. Bjorn Eek’s opinion that Franco was “totally disabled” and should remain off work from January 26, 1996, to April 8, 1996. Because Dr. Eek was one of Franco’s treating physicians, the ALJ and Council owed his opinion special deference. 2 The ALJ’s and the Council’s failure to set forth specific, legitimate reasons for rejecting Dr. Eek’s opinion was legal error.

Franco’s primary treating physician, Dr. Walter Strauser, opined that…

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.