Kimberly Jeanquart v. Michael J. Astrue, No. 11-2041 (8th Cir. 2011)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Civil Case - social security. Denial of supplemental security income is affirmed, as ALJ failure to give controlling weight to certain medical opinions was proper and substantial evidence supported determination of less-than-marked functional limitations.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 11-2041 ___________ Kimberly Jeanquart, On behalf of J.A.J., Appellant, v. Michael J. Astrue, Social Security Commissioner, Appellee. * * * * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Western * District of Arkansas. * * [UNPUBLISHED] * * * ___________ Submitted: October 12, 2011 Filed: November 10, 2011 ___________ Before LOKEN, BYE, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM. Kimberly Jeanquart, on behalf of her minor child J.A.J., appeals the district court s1 order affirming the denial of supplemental security income. Upon de novo review of the record, see Moore ex rel. Moore v. Barnhart, 413 F.3d 718, 721 (8th Cir. 2005), we conclude (1) that it was proper for the administrative law judge (ALJ) 1 The Honorable Erin Setser, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Arkansas, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). not to give controlling weight to the opinions of treating physician Kevin Jackson and one-time consulting psychologist Vann Smith, see Medhaug v. Astrue, 578 F.3d 805, 815 (8th Cir. 2009) (because record must be evaluated as whole, treating physician s opinion does not automatically control); Charles v. Barnhart, 375 F.3d 777, 783 (8th Cir. 2004) (generally when consulting physician examines claimant only once, his opinion is not substantial evidence); and (2) that substantial evidence supports the ALJ s determination that J.A.J. had less-than-marked limitations in the functional domains of attending and completing tasks and health and physical well-being, see 20 C.F.R. § 416.926a (functional equivalence for children). The district court is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________ -2-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
