Crystal M Stanley v. Michael J Astrue, No. 5:2011cv01331 - Document 20 (C.D. Cal. 2012)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER by Magistrate Judge Ralph Zarefsky. (ib)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
O 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CRYSTAL M. STANLEY, Plaintiff, 12 13 14 vs. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security, 15 Defendant. 16 17 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CASE NO. ED CV 11-01331 RZ MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER In seeking reversal of the Social Security Commissioner s determination that 18 she is not disabled, Plaintiff Crystal M. Stanley raises a single argument: that the 19 Administrative Law Judge did not make proper findings as to her credibility. The Court 20 does not agree. 21 Plaintiff has three impairments, asthma, carpal tunnel syndrome, and shoulder 22 pain, that are considered severe within the meaning of the Social Security Act. [AR 44] The 23 Administrative Law Judge found that these impairments did not disable her, however, 24 because she retained the capacity to work. In doing so, the Administrative Law Judge 25 stated that Plaintiff s testimony was not entirely credible, and then proceeded to explain 26 why. [AR 48] 27 Pain alone, as testified to by a claimant, cannot be the basis for a finding of 28 disability. 42 U.S.C. ยง 423(d)(5)(A). However, because pain is idiosyncratic and not 1 capable of accurate objective measurement, a claim of pain that is legitimately tied to an 2 impairment also cannot be dismissed out of hand. Rather, the Administrative Law Judge 3 must give specific and legitimate reasons for finding not credible the testimony that the 4 pain ( excess pain ) is greater than would normally be anticipated. Bunnell v. Sullivan, 5 947 F.2d 341 (9th Cir. 1991) (en banc); Smolen v. Chater, 80 F.3d 1273 (9th Cir. 1996). 6 In saying that Plaintiff s testimony was not entirely credible [AR 48], the 7 Administrative Law Judge mentioned a number of factors. She mentioned the length of 8 time since Plaintiff had been hospitalized for asthma, the fact that Plaintiff uses a breathing 9 machine twice a week, and that her breathing has improved. She mentioned that doctors 10 cannot find any source for the shoulder pain and that none have recommended surgery. 11 The Administrative Law Judge also mentioned that Plaintiff has no problems sitting or 12 standing, and is able to perform a variety of activities. [AR 48] 13 In this Court, Plaintiff protests that she does not have to show that she can 14 only vegetate in a dark room before her statements must be believed. This is, of course, 15 true. It also is not relevant here. Many of the tasks Plaintiff performs, such as child 16 rearing, grocery shopping and laundry can be arduous in their own right, and the ability to 17 perform them, together with other activities, can legitimately be a factor for not believing 18 a claimant as to the alleged extent of her pain. Bunnell, 947 F.2d at 346; Fair v. Bowen, 19 885 F.2d 597, 603 (9th Cir. 1989). Nor is medical evidence irrelevant in the assessment 20 of credibility; while it alone cannot usually be the basis for disbelief, it certainly can be a 21 factor that the Administrative Law Judge considers. Rollins v. Massanari, 261 F. 3d 853, 22 857 (9th Cir. 2001). 23 24 25 The Administrative Law Judge did all that the law required of her. There is no basis for disturbing the decision, and it is affirmed. DATED: May 31, 2012 26 27 28 RALPH ZAREFSKY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE -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.
