Brock v. Astrue, No. 11-2496 (8th Cir. 2012)
Annotate this CasePlaintiff appealed the district court's order affirming the Commissioner's denial of his application for supplemental security income benefits. Specifically, he objected to the ALJ's finding, without considering the testimony of a vocational expert, that plaintiff was able to engage in gainful activity. The court concluded that the ALJ erred by relying solely on the guidelines to determine plaintiff was "not disabled." Because the ALJ determined that plaintiff suffered from severe mental impairments, the ALJ should have consulted a vocational expert in determining whether plaintiff had the residual functional capacity to perform other jobs that existed in significant number in the national economy. Accordingly, the court reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
Court Description: Civil case - Social Security. Because the ALJ determined claimant suffered from severe mental impairments, the ALJ should have consulted a vocational expert in determining whether claimant had the residual functional capacity to perform other jobs in the national economy; reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
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.