Meeks
Meeks v. Astrue
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Kirk W. Meeks appeals from district court’s judgment affirming an Administrative Law Judge’s (“ALJ”) decision denying his applications for social security disabili *525 ty benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 401-34 . We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we reverse the judgment of the district court with instructions to remand to the ALJ for the calculation and award of benefits.
Because Meeks presented objective medical evidence of degenerative disc disease and a traumatic head injury, the ALJ’s failure to provide clear and convincing reasons for rejecting Meeks’ subjective symptom testimony is legal error. See Smolen v. Chater, 80 F.3d 1273, 1281-82 (9th Cir.1996). The reasons the ALJ did provide were not sufficiently clear and convincing: Meeks’ failure to seek medical treatment after 1996 was credibly explained as a consequence of his lack of resources, both mental and financial, to secure treatment. See Gamble v. Chater, 68 F.3d 319, 321 (9th Cir.1995) (“It flies in the face of the patent purposes of the Social Security Act to deny benefits to someone because he is too poor to obtain medical treatment that may…