Jorge L. SUAREZ v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Cases that cite this one
27 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.
- Resendes v. Astrue (District Court, D. Massachusetts 2011)
- Carreau v. SSA (District Court, D. New Hampshire 2001)
- Durant v. Chater (District Court, D. Massachusetts 1995)
- Angela Calderon Nieves v. Secretary of Health and Human Services (1st Cir. 1985)
- Denise Dimambro v. US Social Security Administration, Acting Commissioner (District Court, D. New Hampshire 2018)
- Walter v. SSA (District Court, D. New Hampshire 2016)
- Marintez v. Colvin (District Court, D. New Hampshire 2014)
- Bell v. SSA (District Court, D. New Hampshire 2012)
- Rodriguez v. Astrue (District Court, D. Massachusetts 2010)
- Bartlett v. Mutual Pharmaceutical (District Court, D. New Hampshire 2009)
- Querido v. Barnhart (District Court, D. Massachusetts 2004)
- Lord v. Apfel (District Court, D. New Hampshire 2000)
- Lord v. SSA (District Court, D. New Hampshire 2000)
- Nguyen v. Chater (1st Cir. 1999)
- Hung NGUYEN, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. Shirley S. CHATER, Defendant, Appellee (1st Cir. 1999)
- Nguyen v. Chater (1st Cir. 1999)
- Rohrberg v. Apfel (District Court, D. Massachusetts 1998)
- Field v. Chater (District Court, D. Maine 1995)
- Ruperto Torres v. Secretary of Health & Human Services (District Court, D. Puerto Rico 1992)
- Quijano v. Secretary of Health & Human Services (District Court, D. Puerto Rico 1992)
- Morin v. Secretary of Health & Human Services (District Court, D. New Hampshire 1992)
- Juana Davila Melendez v. Secretary of Health and Human Services (1st Cir. 1990)
- Miguel A. ROSADO, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Defendant, Appellee (1st Cir. 1986)
- Lingo v. Secretary of Health and Human Services (District Court, N.D. Ohio 1986)
- Jose E. Carrillo Marin v. Secretary of Health and Human Services (1st Cir. 1985)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
From our review of the record in this case, we conclude that there was not substantial evidence to support the Secretary’s finding of no disability for the period from June 1977 until June 1979. Rather the uncontroverted medical evidence showed that claimant suffered from chronic, undifferentiated schizophrenia with depression, agitation, hallucinations, and delusions, as well as little ability to tend to daily activities or to sustain interpersonal relationships. As such, claimant’s disorder met the definition in the Listing of Impairments for a functional psychotic disorder, 20 CFR Appendix 1, § 12.03 and he was entitled to a presumption of disability for the relevant time period. The AU, although empowered to make credibility determinations and to resolve conflicting evidence, Miranda v. Secretary of HEW, 514 F.2d 996, 1000 (1st Cir. 1975), was not at liberty simply to ignore uncontroverted medical reports. See, e.g., Walden v. Schweiker, 672 F.2d 835, 839-40 (11th Cir. 1982); Smith v. Califano, 637 F.2d 968, 970-71 (3rd Cir. 1981); Behnen v. Califano, 588 F.2d 252, 254 (8th Cir. 1978); Hassler v. Weinberger, 502 F.2d 172, 178 (7th Cir. 1974).
*2 Since claimant’s evidence demonstrated the existence of a “Listed Impairment”, there is no need for further proceedings. The judgment of the District Court is reversed, and the case is remanded with instructions to remand to the Secretary for the payment of benefits to the claimant for the period from June 1977 to June 1979 or for such longer period as he continues to be disabled. See Walden v. Schweiker, supra at 840. Chicager v. Califano, 574 F.2d 161, 164 (3rd Cir. 1978).
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.