Buddy Perrymore, Jr. v. Carolyn W. Colvin, No. 14-3507 (8th Cir. 2015)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Per Curiam - Before Shepherd, Bye and Kelly, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Social Security. Denial of benefits was supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 14-3507 ___________________________ Buddy Jack Perrymore, Jr. lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant v. Carolyn W. Colvin, Acting Commissioner, Social Security Administration lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellee ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas - Ft. Smith ____________ Submitted: May 26, 2015 Filed: June 22, 2015 [Unpublished] ____________ Before SHEPHERD, BYE, and KELLY, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Buddy Jack Perrymore, Jr. appeals the district court’s1 order affirming the denial of disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income. We agree with the district court that the administrative decision denying benefits is supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole. See Lott v. Colvin, 772 F.3d 546, 548 (8th Cir. 2014). As to Perrymore’s assertions of error, we find that the administrative law judge’s (ALJ’s) determination on the severity of Perrymore’s alleged disabling impairments is consistent with the record as a whole. See Kirby v. Astrue, 500 F.3d 705, 707-08 (8th Cir. 2007) (it is claimant’s burden to establish that impairment is severe; if impairment has no more than minimal effect on claimant’s ability to work, it does not qualify as severe). We also conclude that the ALJ properly discounted the residual-functional-capacity opinions of certain medical professionals. See Davidson v. Astrue, 501 F.3d 987, 990-91 (8th Cir. 2007) (treating physician’s opinion does not automatically control, and may be discounted if inconsistent with his own treatment notes); Kirby, 500 F.3d at 709 (consulting physician’s opinion deserves no special weight, and is entitled to less weight when based largely on claimant’s subjective complaints). Accordingly, it was proper for the ALJ to apply the Medical Vocational Guidelines to find Perrymore not disabled. The judgment of the district court is affirmed. ______________________________ 1 The Honorable Barry A. Bryant, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Arkansas, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). -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.
