Savannah

Savannah v. Astrue

Good Law
252 F. App'x 783
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 25, 2007No. 06-35066California705 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM ****

Lori Savannah appeals the district court’s judgment affirming the Administrative Law Judge’s (“ALJ”) decision denying her application for disability benefits. We hold that the ALJ erred in determining that selective mutism is not a “medically determinable impairment” and remand for a determination as to whether Savannah actually suffers from the disorder and, if so, whether her impairment is severe for the purposes of 20 C.F.R. § 416.920 (a)(4)(h).

Selective mutism is a recognized mental disorder listed in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (“DSM-IV”). The Commissioner does not argue that the DSM-IV criteria for diagnosing selective mutism are in dispute or are not accepted by the medical community. Compare Brown v. Shalala, 15 F.3d 97, 99-100 (8th Cir.1994) (upholding ALJ’s determination that environmental illness was not a “medically determinable” impairment, where a medical expert offered unrefuted testimony that the techniques underlying the claimant’s diagnosis were not “medically acceptable”). Thus, because selective mutism “can be shown by medically acceptable clinical ... diagnostic techniques,” 20 C.F.R. § 416.908 , it constitutes…

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.