Bronder

Bronder v. Barnhart

Good Law
124 F. App'x 544
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 28, 2005No. 03-35955California576 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Jessica Bronder appeals the decision denying her application for disabled child’s benefits and Social Security disability benefits. Bronder argues the administrative law judge (“ALJ”) erred in discrediting her statements, discounting the findings of her treating physicians, concluding her impairments did not satisfy Listing of Impairments § 12.02, 20 C.F.R. pt. 404, subpt. P, app. 1, § 12.02, and relying on the testimony of a vocational consultant.

A. Credibility

The ALJ’s credibility determination was not in error; he made specific findings based on Bronder’s inconsistent statements. See Light v. Soc. Sec. Admin., 119 F.3d 789 , 792 (9th Cir.1997). For instance, the ALJ correctly noted that at the January 1999 hearing Bronder stated she left her job as a scrapper because of her physical condition, but in December 1997 stated that the job ended because it was the end of the season.

B. Treating physician testimony

The ALJ erroneously disregarded the opinion of Bronder’s treating physician, Dr. Gorsuch. “If the ALJ chooses to disregard a treating physician’s medical opinion, he must set forth specific, legitimate reasons for doing so, and this decision itself must…

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.