Barbara Ray v. Kilolo Kijakazi, No. 21-1521 (8th Cir. 2021)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: [Per Curiam - Before Loken, Benton, and Kobes, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Social Security. The ALJ properly weighed the medical opinion evidence and did not fail to develop the record; the 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. 21-1521 ___________________________ Barbara Ray 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for the Western District of Arkansas - El Dorado ____________ Submitted: September 24, 2021 Filed: September 29, 2021 [Unpublished] ____________ Before LOKEN, BENTON, and KOBES, Circuit Judges.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). Barbara Ray 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 Kraus v. Saul, 988 F.3d 1019, 1023-24 (8th Cir. 2021) (de novo review of district court’s judgment; this court will affirm unless Commissioner’s findings are not supported by substantial evidence). Specifically, we agree that the ALJ properly weighed the medical opinion evidence, see Miller v. Colvin, 784 F.3d 472, 478 (8th Cir. 2015) (ALJ was free to discount treating source’s opinion, as it was not wellsupported by objective medical evidence and was inconsistent with other evidence in record); Lacroix v. Barnhart, 465 F.3d 881, 887 (8th Cir. 2006) (ALJ did not err in giving more weight to opinion of examining physician than to opinions of treating therapist, as ALJ found examiner’s opinion more consistent with medical evidence and claimant’s daily activities); and did not fail to fully develop the record, see Hensley v. Colvin, 829 F.3d 926, 932 (8th Cir. 2016) (there is no requirement that RFC finding be supported by specific medical opinion); Stormo v. Barnhart, 377 F.3d 801, 806 (8th Cir. 2004) (ALJ did not fail to fully develop record, as no crucial issue was undeveloped, and examining physicians provided clinical data and observations about claimant’s limitations). We decline to address Ray’s new arguments on appeal. See Gragg v. Astrue, 615 F.3d 932, 938 (8th Cir. 2010). The judgment is affirmed. ______________________________ 2 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.
