In Pelkey v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. Admin., No. 1:19-cv-11479-IT, 2021 WL 1940621 (D. Mass. May 14, 2021), the District Judge adopted and affirmed a Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendations regarding Scott Pelkey's claims. Pelkey claimed Social Security Disability Insurance benefits and Supplement Security Income. Both claims were denied by the Social Security Administration for lack of evidence in the administrative record.
Pelkey asked for permission to put recent reports of his treating physicians in the record that supported his claims of mental impairments and mental health conditions that qualified him for SSDI and SSI. The Magistrate Judge reported that Mr. Pelkey showed "good cause" for his request and recommended that Pelkey's motion to supplement the record be granted.
The District Judge agreed, based on what was already in the administrative record in this case. The Court pointed out that while the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration speculated that Mr. Pelkey could have easily obtained the reports of his treating physicians earlier than he did, and put them in the record below, it was just as easy -- and just as irrelevant, ultimately -- to speculate that Pelkey did not obtain the reports confirming his mental impairments earlier than he did, for the very reason that he suffered from the mental impairments he claimed:
Speculation either way is of little import, however, where the Reports were obtained from Plaintiff's treating physicians, without any suggestion of gamesmanship, following further medical examination of an individual with ongoing mental health issues.
Pelkey, 2021 WL 1940621, at *4.
Sometimes giving people the benefit of the doubt is good law as well as a good practice for living.
Please read the disclaimer. ©2021 Dennis J. Wall. All rights reserved.