Schake v. Berryhill

Background

Darin Mathew Schake applied for Social Security disability income benefits after a May 18, 2012 motorcycle accident. The opinion states that he suffered a significant head injury, multiple fractures, a ruptured spleen, and seizures. He also reported severe pain, depression, balance problems, headaches, and difficulty lifting, standing, kneeling, concentrating, handling stress, and adjusting to changes in routine.

An Administrative Law Judge (ALJ), Peter Kimball, denied Schake’s application after a hearing. The ALJ found that Schake had several severe impairments, including traumatic brain injury, mood disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder, anxiety disorder, memory and executive-function deficits, seizure disorder, cervical spine degeneration, and surgically treated left clavicle and scapula fractures. The ALJ determined that Schake could perform light work with additional restrictions, could not perform his past relevant work, but could perform jobs existing in significant numbers in the national economy. The Social Security Appeals Council declined review, making the ALJ’s decision the Commissioner’s final decision.

Issues and analysis

The parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment. Schake challenged the ALJ’s findings in two principal ways: he argued that his impairments met or medically equaled certain regulatory listings, and he argued that the ALJ’s residual functional capacity (RFC)—the most a person can do despite medical limitations—was not supported by substantial evidence.

The court rejected Schake’s challenge concerning Listing 11.02 for convulsive epilepsy. Although the record contained reports of seizures, some reports were uncertain or lacked the detailed seizure descriptions required by the listing. The court also found that, even assuming all the listed seizures occurred, they did not happen at least monthly as required by the version of Listing 11.02 applicable to the case. The court agreed that substantial evidence supported the ALJ’s finding that Schake’s seizures were generally controlled when he followed prescribed medication treatment. It also rejected Schake’s argument that financial difficulties justified his medication noncompliance, reasoning that the record contained evidence the ALJ could consider concerning his use of cannabis and failure to pursue available assistance with prescription costs.

The court also upheld the ALJ’s findings that Schake’s mental impairments did not satisfy the applicable mental-disorder listings. The ALJ found mild limitations in daily activities and moderate limitations in social functioning and concentration, persistence, and pace. The court cited evidence that Schake lived independently, performed household tasks, went into public places, interacted with family and friends, managed money and household accounts, followed some television programs, played guitar, and completed various chores and projects. The court acknowledged evidence of greater difficulty but concluded that the ALJ’s findings remained supported by substantial evidence.

The court further concluded that the RFC was adequately supported. The RFC limited Schake to simple, routine, repetitive tasks that were not performed at a production-rate pace and to occasional interaction with supervisors, coworkers, and the public. The ALJ also included restrictions addressing exposure to hazards, machinery, and heights because of Schake’s seizure disorder. The court found that these restrictions accounted for the evidence concerning Schake’s memory, attention, concentration, social functioning, and seizures. It found no error in the ALJ’s treatment of opinions from Dr. Dorothy Edelson and Dr. Paul Atkinson and noted that an RFC does not have to be supported by one specific medical opinion.

Disposition

The court ordered that Schake’s motion for summary judgment was denied, the Commissioner’s motion for summary judgment was granted, and the matter was dismissed with prejudice. Judgment was ordered to be entered accordingly.