Priest v. Barnhart’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 district ·

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Considering the above quoted statements as well as the medical record here, the court concludes there is no substantial evidence to sustain the ALJ’s finding “that the diagnosis of fibromyalgia cannot be medically determined.” (Tr. 29). Even though the claimant complained of symptoms consistent with fibromyalgia, the ALJ based his conclusion that there was no medi cally determinable impairment exclusively on his interpretation of Dr. Lies’ records and on the asserted lack of objective documentation. The ALJ reveals his fundamental misunderstanding of fibromyalgia in asserting that there must be objective documentation of this condition (other than the plaintiffs complaints) before there is a medically determinable impairment. As the Eighth Circuit said in Brosnahan [v. Barnhart, 336 F.3d 671 (8th Cir.2003) ], the “objective medical evidence of fibromyalgia” was the “consistent trigger-point findings” and the plaintiffs “consistent complaint during her relatively frequent physicians’ visits of variable and unpredictable pain, stiffness, fatigue, and ability to function.” 336 F.3d at 678 . The medical record in this case, as summarized above, is replete with consistent trigger-point findings and plaintiffs ongoing complaints of pain, fatigue, and inability to sleep during her frequent visits to physicians and emergency rooms.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 773 F. Supp. 2d 984 - Wulf v. Astrue