Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Tommy L. Lansford v. JoAnne B. Barnhart, 02-3927 (2003)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit Number: 02-3927 Visitors: 38
Filed: Sep. 22, 2003
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 02-3927 _ Tommy L. Lansford, * * Appellant, * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Eastern v. * District of Missouri. * Jo Anne B. Barnhart, Commissioner * [UNPUBLISHED] of the Social Security Administration, * * Appellee. * _ Submitted: September 11, 2003 Filed: September 22, 2003 _ Before MELLOY, RICHARD S. ARNOLD, and FAGG, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Tommy L. Lansford sought disability insurance benefits assertin
More
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 02-3927 ___________ Tommy L. Lansford, * * Appellant, * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Eastern v. * District of Missouri. * Jo Anne B. Barnhart, Commissioner * [UNPUBLISHED] of the Social Security Administration, * * Appellee. * ___________ Submitted: September 11, 2003 Filed: September 22, 2003 ___________ Before MELLOY, RICHARD S. ARNOLD, and FAGG, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM. Tommy L. Lansford sought disability insurance benefits asserting he was disabled by obesity, hypertension, chronic knee problems, status post-prostate cancer, urinary stress incontinence, and degenerative joint disease. An administrative law judge (ALJ) held Lansford was not disabled before his insured status expired. The ALJ found Lansford’s impairments or combination of impairments did not meet or equal any listed impairment, Lansford’s claims of physical disability were not credible, and Lansford retained the residual functional capacity to perform medium work in the national economy. The district court* affirmed. Because substantial evidence on the record as a whole supports the ALJ’s decision, we affirm the denial of benefits. First, the ALJ properly found Lansford’s impairments or combination of impairments did not meet or equal any listed impairment. The listing for arthritis of a major weight-bearing joint was not met because Lansford did not have a gross anatomical deformity of his hip or knee or reconstructive surgery or surgical arthrodesis. The ALJ also adequately considered Lansford’s obesity, from which Lansford suffered years before the alleged onset of disability. Second, the ALJ properly discredited Lansford’s subjective complaints based on the lack of supporting objective medical evidence, Lansford’s noncompliance with recommended treatment, his reported search for other work and receipt of unemployment benefits, his daily activities, and the lack of any contemporaneous report of disability by his doctors. Third, the ALJ properly decided Lansford retained the residual functional capacity to perform medium work based on the impairments the ALJ found to be credible. Having considered and rejected all of Lansford’s arguments, we affirm on the basis of the district court’s memorandum and order. ______________________________ * The Honorable Catherine D. Perry, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri. -2-
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer