Mark Hall v. Michael J. Astrue, No. 11-2652 (8th Cir. 2012)Annotate this Case
Court Description: Civil case - Social Security. Denial of disability benefits affirmed as the ALJ's credibility determinations were entitled to deference and the decision was supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole.
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 11-2652 ___________ Mark Alan Hall, Appellant, v. Michael J. Astrue, Social Security Commissioner, Appellee. * * * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Western * District of Missouri. * * [UNPUBLISHED] * * * ___________ Submitted: March 7, 2012 Filed: March 14, 2012 ___________ Before LOKEN, BOWMAN, and BENTON, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM. Mark Alan Hall appeals from the order of the District Court1 order upholding the denial of disability insurance benefits. Upon de novo review, we conclude that the decision of the administrative law judge (ALJ) is supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole. See Partee v. Astrue, 638 F.3d 860, 863 (8th Cir. 2011) (standard of review). Specifically, we conclude that the ALJ s credibility determination is entitled to deference, see Finch v. Astrue, 547 F.3d 933, 935 (8th 1 The Honorable Dean Whipple, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri. Cir. 2008) (noting that this Court defers to the ALJ s credibility determination if the ALJ explicitly discredits the claimant s testimony and gives good reasons for doing so); that the ALJ was not required to develop the record further on Hall s depression, see Martise v. Astrue, 641 F.3d 909, 926 27 (8th Cir. 2011) (explaining that the ALJ is required to order medical examinations only if the medical records before him do not provide sufficient evidence to determine whether the claimant is disabled); Dunahoo v. Apfel, 241 F.3d 1033, 1039 (8th Cir. 2001) (observing that a failure to allege depression on [an] application for disability benefits is significant, even if the evidence of depression was later developed ); that Hall failed to meet his burden of establishing that his depression or fibromyalgia were severe impairments, see Kirby v. Astrue, 500 F.3d 705, 707 08 (8th Cir. 2007) ( An impairment is not severe if it amounts only to a slight abnormality that would not significantly limit the claimant s physical or mental ability to do basic work activities. ); and that the ALJ s determination as to Hall s physical residual functional capacity (RFC) is supported by substantial evidence, see Jones v. Astrue, 619 F.3d 963, 971 (8th Cir. 2010) (noting that the ALJ is responsible for determining RFC based on all relevant evidence and that the determination must be supported by some medical evidence). The District Court is affirmed, and we deny Hall s motion to supplement the record. ______________________________ -2-