SHELIA H., Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant
Aug 25, 2023OUTCOME:
This case reaffirmed that an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) must meaningfully evaluate a claimant’s testimony—particularly when it directly affects employability—and must build a “logical bridge” betwe ... en the evidence and the residual functional capacity (RFC) finding. Here, although the ALJ acknowledged the claimant's seizure history, he failed to address her testimony that she experienced at least four seizures per month, each requiring hours of recovery—evidence that, if credited, would exceed the vocational expert’s tolerance of more than one absence per month and therefore be work-preclusive. The judge concluded that the ALJ’s omission prevented meaningful judicial review and was not supported by substantial evidence, recommending reversal and remand under Sentence Four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). The case underscores that even where objective testing is mixed or inconclusive, an ALJ must explicitly evaluate symptom testimony and its vocational impact rather than silently discounting it.
