Rossello v. Astrue

Cristina Rossello (plaintiff) was diagnosed and treated for mental disorders from the ages of 16 through 19, being institutionalized for part of that time. In 1993, Rossello’s father applied for child’s disability insurance benefits on her behalf. However, Rossello worked several jobs after turning 22. In 1986, Rossello worked for a company that was partly owned by her uncle, whom she lived with at the time. Rossello continued to work for her uncle through 1987, with her earnings from that work accounting for a majority of her average monthly earnings both years. Despite medical evidence, an administrative-law judge found that Rossello was not disabled because she had engaged in substantial gainful activity (SGA) after her twenty-second birthday. Rossello appealed to the appeals council, which allowed her to rebut the presumption that her work in 1986 and 1987 constituted SGA based on her earnings by showing the earnings were subsidized. Rossello’s uncle provided a statement that he would not have hired Rossello if she was not his niece, that the job provided Rossello a safe environment where she could be constantly supervised, and that the work only consisted of simple tasks. The appeals council denied Rossello’s appeal, concluding there was no evidence of subsidy. Rossello filed suit in a United States district court, alleging that the administration’s decision was not supported by substantial evidence.