Christina Eaton v. Kilolo Kijakazi, No. 20-2932 (8th Cir. 2021)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: [Per Curiam - Before Colloton, Gruender, and Kobes, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Social Security. The agency's denial of disability benefits was supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole; the record supports the ALJ's finding that claimant's impairments did not meet the mental disorder listings and the determination of claimant's residual functional capacity.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 20-2932 ___________________________ Christina L. Eaton lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant v. Kilolo Kijakazi,1 Acting Commissioner of Social Security Administration lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellee ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City ____________ Submitted: July 20, 2021 Filed: July 23, 2021 [Unpublished] ____________ Before COLLOTON, GRUENDER, and KOBES, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. 1 Kilolo Kijakazi has been appointed to serve as Acting Commissioner of Social Security, and is substituted as appellee pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 43(c). Christina Eaton appeals the district court’s2 order affirming the denial of disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income. We agree with the court that substantial evidence in the record as a whole supports the adverse decision. See Twyford v. Comm’r, Soc. Sec. Admin., 929 F.3d 512, 516 (8th Cir. 2019) (de novo review of district court’s judgment; this court will affirm unless Commissioner’s findings are unsupported by substantial evidence or result from legal error). Specifically, we conclude the record supports the administrative law judge’s (ALJ’s) finding that Eaton’s impairments did not meet the mental disorder listings, see id. at 517 (ALJ’s finding that listing was not met was supported by treatment notes and claimant’s daily activities); and the ALJ’s determination of Eaton’s residual functional capacity (RFC), see Wildman v. Astrue, 596 F.3d 959, 969 (8th Cir. 2010) (ALJ did not err in failing to include limitation in RFC, as he determined that claimant’s allegations about such limitation were not credible). We find no merit to Eaton’s argument that the ALJ erred by failing to recontact the medical expert after the hearing. See Onstad v. Shalala, 999 F.2d 1232, 1234 (8th Cir. 1993) (reversal due to failure to develop record is only warranted where such failure is unfair or prejudicial; no prejudice where claimant did not show that evidence ALJ failed to obtain would have made difference in case). The judgment is affirmed. ______________________________ 2 The Honorable John T. Maughmer, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Missouri, 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.
