Jager

Jager v. Barnhart

Good Law
192 F. App'x 589
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 14, 2006No. 04-35776California1,355 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Joan Jager appeals the district court’s order affirming the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration’s decision to deny her application for social security disability benefits. Because the parties are familiar with the facts, we recite here only those facts necessary to explain our decision. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we reverse and remand to the district court with instructions to remand to the Commissioner for further proceedings.

We review de novo the district court’s order upholding the Commissioner’s denial of benefits. Benton v. Barnhart, 331 F.3d 1030, 1035 (9th Cir.2003). We must affirm the Commissioner’s decision if it is supported by substantial evidence and correctly applies the law. Holohan v. Massanari, 246 F.3d 1195, 1201 (9th Cir.2001).

I. Rejection of Evidence

The ALJ improperly rejected the opinion of Dr. Ehly, Jager’s treating physician for ten years. Dr. Ehly opined that since the onset of her illness, Jager has “never been able to return to full time work” and “her ability to perform in a competitive work situation is impaired.” Disregarding Dr. Ehly’s opinion, the ALJ relied on the opinions of Dr.…

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.