Lamear v. Berryhill, No. 15-35088 (9th Cir. 2017)
Annotate this CaseThe Ninth Circuit reversed the denial of disability insurance benefits, holding that the ALJ failed to reconcile an apparent conflict between the testimony of the vocational expert and the Department of Labor’s Dictionary of Occupational Titles (DOT). Because the panel could not determine from the record, the DOT, or the panel's common experience whether the jobs in question require both hands, the panel could not say that the ALJ's failure to inquire was harmless. Accordingly, the panel remanded the case to permit the ALJ to follow up with the vocational expert.
Court Description: Social Security. The panel reversed the district court’s judgment affirming the Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of a claimant’s application for disability insurance benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act. The vocational expert opined that claimant, who had left hand manipulative limitations, could still work as an office helper, mail clerk, or parking lot cashier; and the administrative law judge (“ALJ”) found that claimant was not disabled. The panel held that the ALJ failed to reconcile an apparent conflict between the testimony of the vocational expert and the Department of Labor’s Dictionary of Occupational Titles (“DOT”). Specifically, the panel held that it could not say that, based on common experience, it was likely and foreseeable that an office helper, mail clerk, or parking lot cashier with limitations on his ability to “handle, finger and feel with the left hand” could perform his duties. The panel noted that the DOT’s lengthy descriptions for the jobs strongly suggested that using both hands would be necessary to perform the tasks. Absent anything in the record to explain the apparent discrepancy, the panel reversed and remanded so that the ALJ could ask the vocational expert to reconcile the jobs with claimant’s
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.