Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

708 F.2d 351

Docket No. 83-1053.

Burns v. Schweiker

Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals

Submitted June 7, 1983.

Decided June 10, 1983.

Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1983-06-10

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently June 1983

1 federal appellate ·

2 counsel of record

Applies 42 U.S.C. § 423 (§ 223 of the Social Security Act of 1935)

Relies on Weber v. Harris

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by (per_curiam) · Decided 1983-06-10

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1*352J. Paul McGrath, Asst. Atty. Gen., George W. Proctor, U.S. Atty., Frank V. Smith, III, Regional Atty., Charlene M. Seifert, Asst. Regional Atty., U.S. Dept, of Health and Human Services, Dallas, Tex., for appellee.

¶2Thomas & Nussbaum, P.A., Little Rock, Ariz., for appellant.

¶3Before LAY, Chief Judge, and ROSS and McMILLIAN, Circuit Judges.

¶4PER CURIAM.

¶5Ruby Burns appeals from the district court’s1 judgment upholding a decision by the Secretary of Health and Human Services denying disability benefits to Burns. Burns argues that there is not substantial evidence supporting the decision of the Secretary. We affirm.

¶6Burns filed her claim for benefits in September 1980. She asserted that she was totally disabled due to mental illness and an eye disease. After administrative denials, she requested a hearing. An administrative law judge (ALJ) held a hearing in April 1981. In an opinion denying benefits, the ALJ found that Burns had failed to show she was disabled.

¶7The evidence before the ALJ showed that Burns is schizophrenic, but that her condition is controlled fairly well by medication. She has been an out-patient at the Arkansas State Hospital since 1975 and has periodically been hospitalized; however, those hospitalizations have been infrequent. An eye infection causes periodic discomfort, but does not affect her ability to read.

¶8The ALJ noted: “A review of the total evidence of record simply will not support a finding that the claimant’s [Burns’] impairments, either physical or mental, are significantly so severe so as to preclude her from engaging, for a continuous period of more than 12 months, in basic work related functions." The ALJ held that Burns may have shown that her impairments were periodically disabling, but there is nothing to indicate that the disability had or would continue for twelve months.

¶9Burns had the burden of demonstrating disability. Weber v. Harris, 640 F.2d 176 (8th Cir.1981). Disability is defined as the “inability to engage in any substantial gainful activity by reason of any medically determinable physical or mental impairment ... which has lasted or can be expected to last for a continuous period of not less than 12 months.” 42 U.S.C. § 423(d)(1)(A).

¶10The district court found substantial evidence supporting the ALJ’s decision. We have carefully examined the record, and agree. Therefore, the judgment of the district court is affirmed. 8th Cir.R. 14.

/708/f2d/351 · .json · Public domain