Scott v. Berryhill, No. 16-1931 (8th Cir. 2017)
Annotate this CaseThe court affirmed the denial of plaintiff's application for supplemental security income, concluding that substantial evidence supported the ALJ's decision. Substantial evidence supported the ALJ's conclusion that claimant did not meet or equal Listing 12.05C because he did not demonstrate the adaptive function limitations necessary to qualify; the ALJ adequately accounted for plaintiff's limitations in concentration persistence, or pace in the residual functional capacity; and the vocational expert's testimony constituted substantial evidence supporting the ALJ's finding at step five.
Court Description: Gruender, Author, with Colloton and Kelly, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Social Security. Substantial evidence supported the ALJ's determination that claimant did not meet or equal Listing 12.05C; the questions the ALJ posed to the vocational expert accounted for claimant's limitations in concentration, persistence and pace of work; substantial evidence supported the denial of benefits, and the denial is affirmed. Judge Kelly, dissenting.
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.