Doug Weischman v. Carolyn W. Colvin, No. 16-1551 (8th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Per Curiam - Before Wollman, Arnold and Murphy, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Social Security. Substantial evidence supports the ALJ's determination that claimant was not disabled. [ August 16, 2016
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 16-1551 ___________________________ Doug Weischman lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant v. Carolyn W. Colvin, Acting Commissioner of Social Security lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellee ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Little Rock ____________ Submitted: August 12, 2016 Filed: August 17, 2016 [Unpublished] ____________ Before WOLLMAN, ARNOLD, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Douglas Weischman appeals the district court’s1 order affirming the denial of supplemental security income. Upon de novo review, we find that substantial evidence on the record as a whole supports the administrative law judge’s (ALJ’s) decision that Mr. Weischman was not disabled. See Andrews v. Colvin, 791 F.3d 923, 928 (8th Cir. 2015). Specifically, we defer to the ALJ’s credibility findings, see McDade v. Astrue, 720 F.3d 994, 998 (8th Cir. 2013) (credibility findings are entitled to deference if supported by good reasons and substantial evidence); and we find that the ALJ’s determination of Mr. Weischman’s residual functional capacity (RFC), which was more limited than the determinations of the reviewing and consulting physicians, is consistent with the medical evidence and, for the most part, with Mr. Weischman’s own description of his ability to sit, stand, walk and carry, see Myers v. Colvin, 721 F.3d 521, 527 (8th Cir. 2013) (RFC must be determined based on all relevant evidence, including medical records, observations of treating physicians and others, and claimant’s own description of his limitations; RFC must be supported by some medical evidence). The judgment of the district court is affirmed. ______________________________ 1 The Honorable Kristine G. Baker, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable J. Thomas Ray, United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas. -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.
