Dioguardi v. Commissioner of Social Security

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that an ALJ’s “failure to reconcile the RFC statements with medical source statements was error, and based upon the testimony given by the vocational expert, the failure was not harmless.”
• “Having failed to produce reliable evidence, the Commissioner failed to meet her burden at step five of the sequential analysis.”
• citing, inter alia, Fiorello v. Heckler, 725 F.2d 174, 176 (2d Cir. 1983)
• remanding after ALJ “accorded ‘significant weight’” to opinion that restricted overhead reaching but “seemingly did not account in the RFC for the overhead reaching limitations” or “indicate that he was rejecting that portion of the opinion”
• where the ALJ’s “RFC assessment conflicts with an opinion from a medical source, the [ALJ] must explain why the opinion was not adopted.”
• “The plaintiff here is entitled to know why the ALJ chose to disregard the portions of the medical opinions that were beneficial to her application for benefits.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).