From our private database of 35,800+ case briefs...
Rosa v. Astrue
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri
708 F. Supp. 2d 941 (2010)
Kimberly J. Rosa (plaintiff) applied for Social Security disability benefits and supplemental security income, claiming that she had been continuously disabled since October 1, 2006, due to a combination of physical and mental impairments. Following a hearing, an ALJ found that Rosa had severe degenerative disc disease, which was an unlisted impairment, that left Rosa with a residual functional capacity (RFC) to perform a full range of sedentary work, including her past work as an office assistant in a real estate office, thus was not disabled. The ALJ based his RFC determination on the majority of Rosa’s medical evidence, which included reports from six examining doctors’ visits during the year leading up to Rosa’s disability onset date, including two with Rosa’s treating physician in which no evidence of severe impairment was presented or diagnosed. The evidence included results of laboratory findings and medical imaging and noted the impact of treatments that generally presented that Rosa was in good physical condition. The ALJ discounted the 2008 opinion, which was provided for the disability determination on an administrative disability-claim form where the physician indicated that Rosa had a litany of musculoskeletal impairments that prevented her from performing sedentary work because she needed to change positions every 10 to 15 minutes and could not lift more than 10 pounds; push, pull, stoop, squat, or bend repeatedly; or do any of those activities for more than two hours repeatedly. The ALJ noted in his opinion that he found that the report was not supported by the other substantial medical evidence. Instead, the ALJ found that the report was inconsistent with the other evidence. The ALJ’s decision became the final decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, Michael Astrue (defendant). Rosa sought judicial review of the ALJ’s RFC determination, arguing the ALJ failed to give proper weight to the 2008 opinion.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Medler, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 620,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 620,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 35,800 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.