Podgorney

Podgorney v. Barnhart

Good Law
214 F. App'x 648
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 20, 2006No. 05-17221California891 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Victor Podgorney appeals the district court’s order of summary judgment in favor of the Commissioner of the Social Security Agency (the “Agency”) in Podgorney’s action for disability benefits. We reverse the district court and remand the case to allow the Agency to properly consider medical documents omitted from the administrative record.

On March 18, 2002, Podgorney filed an application for Disability Insurance Benefits. After a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”), the Agency denied Podgorney’s claim. Podgorney appealed that ruling to the district court, and on January 6, 2004, the case was remanded to an ALJ for further consideration. On August 12, 2004, an ALJ again denied Podgorney’s claim. In making that determination, the ALJ concluded that a determination by the Department of Veterans Affairs (“VA”) that Podgorney was disabled was not entitled to great weight because it was conclusory in nature, did not adequately explain why Podgorney could not work, and conflicted with other evidence. Although the ALJ received at least four documents relating to the VA’s disability determination, only one of those documents made it into the administrative…

Dissenting Opinion

Bybee, J.

dissenting:

Appellant Victor Podgorney seeks yet a third opportunity to plead his disability benefits claim before the Social Security Administration (“SSA”). The majority accommodates him by holding that Appellant’s benefits claim must be remanded “to allow [SSA] to properly 'consider medical documents,” pertaining to the Department of Veteran’s Affairs’ (“VA”) decision to rate Appellant disabled, that were “omitted from the administrative record.” Maj. Op. at-. I disagree with the majority because I believe that Appellant has had a full and fair hearing on his claims. First, every medical document supporting the VA’s decision—including Appellant’s VA medical files—is included in the administrative record, and there is no evidence that the administrative law judge in this case did not examine the whole record when he denied Appellant’s benefits claim. Second, the only documents omitted from the administrative record are letters informing Appellant of the VA’s determination that he was disabled under its—not SSA’s—standards, and those letters are not material in light of the fact that the administrative record contains all the underlying medical documents that the VA could have…

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.