Claire Eiden v. Sec'y of Health, Educ. & Welfare, 616 F.2d 63 (2d Cir. 1980). · Go Syfert
Search
Claire Eiden v. Sec'y of Health, Educ. & Welfare, 616 F.2d 63 (2d Cir. 1980). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
“we have repeatedly stated that when 'no contradictory evidence is presented, a treating physician's expert opinion is binding on the secretary”
118 citation events (9 in the last 25 years) across 11 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Pagan v. Heckler (nysd, 1985-04-01)
Treatment trajectory · 1980 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1980 2003 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 50 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (verbatim quote) Pagan v. Heckler
S.D.N.Y. · 1985 · signal: see also · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
there is no requirement that medical testimony 'be supported by "objective" clinical or laboratory findings,
discussed Cited as authority (verbatim quote) Irvin v. Heckler (2×) also: Cited as authority (rule)
S.D.N.Y. · 1984 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
we have repeatedly stated that when 'no contradictory evidence is presented, a treating physician's expert opinion is binding on the secretary
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Moran v. Astrue
2d Cir. · 2009 · confidence medium
There, we remanded solely on the 20 ground that the ALJ "did not adequately fulfill his 'affirmative 21 obligation to assist th[e] pro se claimant in developing his 22 case.'" Cruz, 912 F.2d at 12 (alteration omitted) (quoting Eiden 23 v. Sec'y of Health, Educ. & Welfare, 616 F.2d 63, 65 (2d Cir. 24 1980)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Moran v. Astrue
2d Cir. · 2009 · confidence medium
There, we remanded solely on the ground that the ALJ “did not adequately fulfill his ‘affirmative obligation to assist th[e] pro se claimant in developing his case.’ ” Cruz, 912 F.2d at 12 (alteration omitted) (quoting Eiden v. Sec’y of Health, Educ. & Welfare, 616 F.2d 63, 65 (2d Cir.1980)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Rosato v. Barnhart
E.D.N.Y · 2005 · confidence medium
Generally, “ ‘objective’ findings are not required in order to find that an applicant is disabled.” Id. (citing Donato v. Sec. of Dep’t of Health and Human Servs., 721 F.2d 414, 418-19 (2d Cir.1983)) (“Subjective pain may serve as the basis for establishing disability, even if ... unaccompanied by positive clinical findings of other ‘objective’ medical evidence”); see also Cruz v. Sullivan; 912 F.2d 8, 12 (2d Cir.1990); Eiden v. Secretary of Health, Educ., and Welfare, 616 F.2d 63, 65 (2d Cir.1980); Cutler v. Weinberger, 516 F.2d 1282, 1286-87 (2d Cir.1975); Cline v. Sullivan…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Nina Green-Younger v. Joanne B. Barnhart, Commissioner of the Social Security Administration
2d Cir. · 2003 · confidence medium
As a general matter, “objective” findings are not required in order to find that an applicant is disabled. 13 See Donato v. Sec. of Dep’t of Health and Human Servs., 721 F.2d 414, 418-19 (2d Cir.1983) (“Subjective pain may serve as the basis for establishing disability, even if ... unaccompanied by positive clinical findings of other ‘objective’ medical evidence”) (emphasis in original) (citation omitted); Cruz v. Sullivan, 912 F.2d 8, 12 (2d Cir.1990); Eiden v. Secretary of Health, Educ., and Welfare, 616 F.2d 63, 65 (2d Cir.1980); Cutler v. Weinberger, 516 F.2d 1282, 1286-87 (2…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Prentice v. Apfel (2×)
S.D.N.Y. · 1998 · confidence medium
The claimant’s right to a full hearing imposes upon the ALJ an “affirmative obligation to assist [plaintiff] in developing [her] case.” Cruz v. Sullivan, 912 F.2d 8, 12 (2d Cir.1990) (quoting Eiden v. Secretary of HEW, 616 F.2d 63, 65 (2d Cir.1980)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Rodriguez v. Callahan
S.D.N.Y. · 1997 · confidence medium
The ALJ, therefore, had an “affirmative obligation to assist [Rodriguez] in developing [his] case.” See Cruz v. Sullivan, 912 F.2d 8, 12 (2d Cir.1990) (quoting Eiden v. Secretary of Health, Educ. & Welfare, 616 F.2d 63, 65 (2d Cir.1980)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) MARQUEZ ON BEHALF OF INFANTE v. Shalala
S.D.N.Y. · 1995 · confidence medium
The ALJ, therefore, had an “affirmative obligation to assist [Jose] in developing [his] case.” See Cruz, 912 F.2d at 12 (quoting Eiden v. Secretary of Health, Educ. & Welfare, 616 F.2d 63, 65 (2d Cir.1980)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Eugenio CRUZ, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Louis W. SULLIVAN, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant-Appellee
2d Cir. · 1990 · confidence medium
Although we do not at all suggest that the AU was indifferent to Cruz's condition, it is our view that he did not adequately fulfill his “affirmative obligation to assist this pro se claimant in developing [his] case.” Eiden v. Secretary of Health, Educ. & Welfare, 616 F.2d 63, 66 (2d Cir.1980).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Pascual v. Sullivan
S.D.N.Y. · 1989 · confidence medium
Bluvband v. Heckler, 730 F.2d 886, 893 (2d Cir.1984) (citing Eiden v. Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, 616 F.2d 63, 64 (2d Cir.1980)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Wefali v. Secretary of the United States Department of Health & Human Services
E.D.N.Y · 1988 · confidence medium
Moreover, there is no requirement that the physician’s “medical opinion must necessarily be supported by ‘objective’ clinical or laboratory findings.” Cutler v. Weinberger, 516 F.2d 1282, 1287 (2d Cir.1975); Eiden v. Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, 616 F.2d 63, 65 (2d Cir.1980).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Poslednik v. Bowen
S.D.N.Y. · 1987 · confidence medium
See Carnevale v. Gardner, 393 F.2d 889, 890 (2d Cir.1968); Eiden v. Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, 616 F.2d 63, 65 (2d Cir.1980).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Cecilio Hidalgo v. Otis R. Bowen, Secretary of Health and Human Services of the United States (2×)
2d Cir. · 1987 · confidence medium
See Johnson v. Bowen, 817 F.2d 983 (2d Cir.1987); Havas v. Bowen, 804 F.2d 783, 785-86 (2d Cir.1986); Stieberger v. Bowen, 801 F.2d 29, 37 (2d Cir.1986); Schisler, 787 F.2d at 81-84 ; De Leon , 734 F.2d 930, 934-36 ; Bluvband v. Heckler, 730 F.2d 886, 892-93 (2d Cir.1984); Aponte v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 728 F.2d 588, 591 (2d Cir.1984); Ferraris v. Heckler, 728 F.2d 582 , 585-87 (2d Cir.1984); Fiorello v. Heckler, 725 F.2d 174, 176 (2d Cir.1983); Donato v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 721 F.2d 414, 419 (2d Cir.1983); Rivera v. Schweiker, 717 F.2d 719, 723 (2d Cir.1…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Stieberger v. Bowen
2d Cir. · 1986 · confidence medium
Though we have characterized the quantity of such cases as "almost legion," De Leon v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 734 F.2d 930, 937 (2d Cir.1984), there is some force to the Secretary's argument that many of the reversals involve a misapplication of the rule rather than an outright ignoring of it, and that even the few cases where we have said the rule was ignored, e.g., Eiden v. Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, 616 F.2d 63, 64 (2d Cir.1980), do not necessarily demonstrate a policy of non-acquiescence.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Stieberger v. Bowen
2d Cir. · 1986 · confidence medium
Though we have characterized the quantity of such cases as “almost legion,” De Leon v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 734 F.2d 930, 937 (2d Cir.1984), there is some force to the Secretary’s argument that many of the reversals involve a misapplication of the rule rather than an outright ignoring of it, and that even the few cases where we have said the rule was ignored, e.g., Eiden v. Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, 616 F.2d 63, 64 (2d Cir.1980), do not necessarily demonstrate a policy of non-acquiescence.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Gartmann v. Secretary of United States Department of Health & Human Services
E.D.N.Y · 1986 · confidence medium
E.g., Schisler v. Heckler, 787 F.2d 76, 81 (2d Cir.1986); Bluvband v. Heckler, 730 F.2d 886, 893 (2d Cir.1984); Eiden v. Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, 616 F.2d 63, 64 (2d Cir.1980).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Salvati v. Heckler
S.D.N.Y. · 1986 · confidence medium
Although Dr. Rametta stated in his 1980 report that the plaintiff was totally disabled, the AU rejected that conclusion because Dr. Rametta “offered no objective findings to support this conclusion.” It is well established in this Circuit, however, that “there is no requirement that the physician’s medical testimony ‘be supported by “objective” clinical or laboratory findings.’ ” Bluvband v. Heckler, 730 F.2d at 893 (quoting Eiden v. Secretary of HEW, 616 F.2d 63, 65 (2d Cir.1980).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Martinez v. Heckler
E.D.N.Y · 1986 · confidence medium
Eiden v. Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, 616 F.2d 63, 64 (2d Cir.1980).
examined Cited as authority (rule) Spears v. Heckler (3×) also: Cited "see, e.g."
S.D.N.Y. · 1985 · confidence medium
Such material evidence may include " 'evidence bearing'upon [plaintiff's] condition subsequent to the date [of eligibility]’ ’’ to the extent " ‘it may disclose the severity and continuity of impairments existing before.’ ” Eiden v. Secretary of HEW, supra, 616 F.2d at 65 (2d Cir.1980) (quoting Gold v. Secretary of HEW, supra, 463 F.2d at 41-42 ).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Stieberger v. Heckler (2×)
S.D.N.Y. · 1985 · confidence medium
The Second Circuit has recently written: It is well-established in this circuit that “[t]he expert opinions of a treating physician as to the existence of a disability are binding on the fact finder unless contradicted by substantial evidence to the contrary.” Bastien v. Califano, 572 F.2d 908, 912 (2d Cir.1978); see also Donato [v. Secretary of Dept. of Health and Human Services ], 721 F.2d [414] at 419 [2d Cir.1983] (“we have regarded a treating physician’s diagnosis, to the extent it is uncontradicted, as binding”); Rivera v. Schweiker, 717 F.2d [719] at 723 [2d Cir. 1983] (“exp…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Ramirez-Isalquez v. Heckler
S.D.N.Y. · 1985 · confidence medium
See, e.g., DeLeon v. Secretary of Health & Human Resources, 734 F.2d 930 (2d Cir.1984); Bluvband v. Heckler, 730 F.2d 886 (2d Cir.1984); Eiden v. Secretary of Health, Education & Welfare, 616 F.2d 63, 65 (2d Cir.1980).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Buttron v. Heckler
S.D.N.Y. · 1985 · confidence medium
See, e.g., Rivera v. Schweiker, 717 F.2d 719, 723 (2d Cir.1983); Eiden v. Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, 616 F.2d 63, 64 (2d Cir.1980).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Tamborra v. Heckler
S.D.N.Y. · 1985 · confidence medium
See, e.g., Rivera v. Schweiker, 717 F.2d 719, 723 (2d Cir.1983); Eiden v. Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, 616 F.2d 63, 64 (2d Cir.1980).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Maisch v. Heckler
S.D.N.Y. · 1985 · confidence medium
See, e.g., Rivera v. Schweiker, 717 F.2d 719, 723 (2d Cir.1983); Eiden v. Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, 616 F.2d 63, 64 (2d Cir.1980).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Losco v. Heckler
S.D.N.Y. · 1985 · confidence medium
The expert opinion of the claimant’s treating physician is entitled to particular weight, and “in the absence of substantial contradictory evidence, the opinion of the claimant’s treating physician is binding on the Secretary.” Hankerson v. Harris, 636 F.2d 893, 896 (2d Cir.1980); see Ferraris v. Heckler, supra, 728 F.2d at 585 ; Donato v. Secretary of HHS, 721 F.2d 414, 419 (2d Cir.1983); Rivera v. Schweiker, supra, 717 F.2d at 723 ; Carroll v. Secretary of HHS, supra, 705 F.2d at 642 ; Aubeuf v. Schweiker, 649 F.2d 107, 112 (2d Cir.1981); Eiden v. Secretary of HEW, 616 F.2d 63, 64 (2…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Sellers v. Heckler
S.D.N.Y. · 1984 · confidence medium
Second, there is no requirement that the treating physician’s “medical testimony ‘be supported by “objective” clinical or laboratory findings.’ ” Eiden v. Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, 616 F.2d 63, 65 (2d Cir.1980) (quoting Cutler v. Weinberger, 516 F.2d 1282, 1287 (2d Cir.1975)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) McGuire v. Heckler (2×)
S.D.N.Y. · 1984 · confidence medium
Id. at 893 ; see id. at 892-93 (citing Donato v. Secretary of Health & Human Servs., 721 F.2d 414, 419 (2d Cir.1983); Rivera v. Schweiker, 717 F.2d 719, 723 (2d Cir.1983); Eiden v. Secretary of Health, Educ. & Welfare, 616 F.2d 63, 64 (2d Cir.1980); Alvarado v. Califano, 605 F.2d 34, 35 (2d Cir.1979); Bastien v. Califano, 572 F.2d 908, 912 (2d Cir.1978); Cutler v. Weinberger, 516 F.2d 1282, 1287 (2d Cir.1975)). 20 .
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Keppler v. Heckler
S.D.N.Y. · 1984 · confidence medium
The expert opinion of the claimant’s treating physician is entitled to particular weight, and “in the absence of substantial contradictory evidence, the opinion of the claimant’s treating physician is binding on the Secretary.” Hankerson v. Harris, 636 F.2d 893, 896 (2d Cir.1980); see Donato v. Secretary of HHS, 721 F.2d 414, 419 (2d Cir.1983); Rivera v. Schweiker, 717 F.2d 719, 723 (2d Cir.1983); Eiden v. Secretary of HEW, 616 F.2d 63, 64 (2d Cir.1980); Alvarado v. Califano, 605 F.2d 34, 35 (2d Cir.1979); Bastien v. Califano, supra, 572 F.2d at 912 .
cited Cited as authority (rule) Walker v. Heckler
S.D.N.Y. · 1984 · confidence medium
Bluvband , at 893 (2d Cir.1984) (quoting Eiden v. Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, 616 F.2d 63, 65 (2d Cir.1980)); see also Cutler v. Weinberger, 516 F.2d 1282, 1286-87 (2d Cir.1975). 23 .
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Moruzzi v. Secretary of Health & Human Services
S.D.N.Y. · 1984 · confidence medium
Bluvband v. Heckler, supra, 892 (2d Cir.1984); Donato v. Secretary of Health & Human Services, supra, 721 F.2d at 419 ; Rivera v. Schweiker, 717 F.2d 719, 723 (2d Cir.1983); Eiden v. Secretary of Health, Education & Welfare, 616 F.2d 63, 64 (2d Cir.1980); Alvarado v. Califano, 605 F.2d 34, 35 (2d Cir.1979) (per curiam); Bastien v. Califano, 572 F.2d 908, 912 (2d Cir.1978).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Paulina BLUVBAND, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Margaret HECKLER, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant-Appellee
2d Cir. · 1984 · confidence medium
Of more significance, however, is the apparent disregard that the AU showed for Dr. Nash’s professional opinion that “due to her hypoglycemia ... [Bluvband] is at present and for the next future totally disabled.” It is well-established in this circuit that “[t]he expert opinions of a treating physician as to the existence of a disability are binding on the fact finder unless contradicted by substantial evidence to the contrary.” Bastien v. Califano, 572 F.2d 908, 912 (2d Cir.1978); see also Donato, 721 F.2d at 419 (“we have regarded a treating physician’s diagnosis, to the exten…
cited Cited as authority (rule) Lanzissero v. Heckler
E.D.N.Y · 1984 · confidence medium
Eiden v. Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, 616 F.2d 63, 64 (2nd Cir.1980).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Graham v. Heckler
S.D.N.Y. · 1984 · confidence medium
Eiden v. Secretary of Health, Education & Welfare, 616 F.2d 63, 64 (2d Cir.1980).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Lemberger v. Heckler
E.D.N.Y · 1984 · confidence medium
Carroll v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 705 F.2d 638, 642 (2d Cir.1983); Eiden v. Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, 616 F.2d 63, 64 (2d Cir.1980); Alvarado v. Calif ano, 605 F.2d 34, 35 (2d Cir.1979); Bastien v. Califano, 572 F.2d 908, 912 (2d Cir.1978); Gold v. Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, 463 F.2d 38, 42 (2d Cir.1972); Ghazibayat v. Schweiker, 554 F.Supp. 1005, 1008 (S.D.N.Y.1983); Ramirez v. Schweiker, 554 F.Supp. 1022, 1024 (S.D.N.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Sherrer v. Secretary of Department of Health & Human Services (2×)
S.D.N.Y. · 1983 · confidence medium
Eiden v. Secretary of Health, Education & Welfare, 616 F.2d 63, 65 (2d Cir.1980); see Hanker-son v. Harris, 636 F.2d 893, 896 (2d Cir.1980). 6 .
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Benita Donato v. Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services of the United States
2d Cir. · 1983 · confidence medium
Singletary v. Secretary of HEW, 623 F.2d 217, 219 (2d Cir.1980); Eiden v. Secretary of HEW, 616 F.2d 63, 64 (2d Cir.1980); Bastien v. Califano, 572 F.2d 908, 912 (2d Cir.1978) (“[t]he expert opinions of a treating physician ... are binding on the factfinder unless contradicted by substantial evidence to the contrary.”).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Edwards v. Secretary of the Department of Health & Human Services
E.D.N.Y · 1983 · confidence medium
Carroll v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 705 F.2d 638, 642 (2d Cir.1983); Eiden v. Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, 616 F.2d 63, 64 (2d Cir.1980); Alvarado v. Califano, 605 F.2d 34, 35 (2d Cir.1979); Bastien v. Califano, 572 F.2d 908, 912 (2d Cir.1978); Gold v. Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, 463 F.2d 38, 42 (2d Cir.1972); Ghazibayat v. Schweiker, 554 F.Supp. 1005, 1008 (S.D.N.Y.1983); Ramirez v. Schweiker, 554 F.Supp. 1022, 1024 (S.D.N.Y.1983).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Jose Rivera v. Richard Schweiker, Secretary of the United States Department of Health and Human Services
2d Cir. · 1983 · confidence medium
Eiden v. Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, 616 F.2d 63, 64 (2d Cir.1980); McLaughlin v. Secretary of *724 Health, Education and Welfare of the United States, 612 F.2d 701, 705 (2d Cir.1980).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Zayas v. Heckler (2×)
S.D.N.Y. · 1983 · confidence medium
Leftenant v. Schweiker, 543 *126 F.Supp. 989, 993 (S.D.N.Y.1982) citing Eiden v. Secretary of HEW, 616 F.2d 63, 64 (2d Cir.1980).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Luz Varela v. Secretary of Health and Human Services (2×)
2d Cir. · 1983 · confidence medium
Factual findings made by an administrative law judge in support of his decision are conclusive if they are supported by “substantial evidence.” Richardson v. Perales, 402 U.S. 389, 401 , 91 S.Ct. 1420, 1427 , 28 L.Ed.2d 842 (1971); Aubeuf v. Schweiker, 649 F.2d 107, 112 (2d Cir.1981); Eiden v. Secretary of H.E.W., 616 F.2d 63, 64 (2d Cir.1980).
cited Cited as authority (rule) McAndrew v. Heckler
S.D.N.Y. · 1983 · confidence medium
Eiden v. Secretary of HEW, 616 F.2d 63, 64 (2d Cir.1980); Alvarado v. Califano, 605 F.2d 34, 35 (2d Cir.1979).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Herbert Carroll v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
2d Cir. · 1983 · confidence medium
Singletary v. Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, 623 F.2d 217, 219 (2d Cir.1980); Eiden v. Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, 616 F.2d 63, 64 (2d Cir.1980); Alvarado v. Califano, 605 F.2d 34, 35 (2d Cir.1979); Bastien v. Califano, 572 F.2d 908, 912 (2d Cir.1978).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Ramirez v. Schweiker
S.D.N.Y. · 1983 · confidence medium
Eiden v. Secretary, 616 F.2d 63, 65 (2d Cir.1980); Bastien v. Califano, 572 F.2d 908, 912 (2d Cir.1978).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Chappell v. Schweiker
N.D. Ga. · 1983 · confidence medium
Id. 839 ; Eiden v. Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, 616 F.2d 63, 64 (2d Cir.1980); Aquino v. Harris, 516 F.Supp. at 273 .
cited Cited as authority (rule) Santiago v. Schweiker
S.D.N.Y. · 1982 · confidence medium
Hankerson, 636 F.2d at 896 ; Eiden v. Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, 616 F.2d 63, 65 (2d Cir. 1980).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Leftenant v. Schweiker
S.D.N.Y. · 1982 · confidence medium
Eiden v. Secretary of HEW, 616 F.2d 63, 64 (2d Cir. 1980); McLaughlin v. Secretary of HEW, 612 F.2d 701, 705 (2d Cir. 1980) (quoting Bastien v. Califano, 572 F.2d 908, 912 (2d Cir. 1978) ). 18 .
cited Cited as authority (rule) Santiago v. Secretary of the Department of Health & Human Services
S.D.N.Y. · 1982 · confidence medium
W., 616 F.2d 63, 65 (2d Cir. 1980).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Aldrich v. Schweiker
D. Vt. · 1982 · confidence medium
E.g., Eiden v. Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, 616 F.2d 63, 64 (2d Cir.1980); Alvarado v. Califano, 605 F.2d 34, 35 (2d Cir.1979); Bastien v. Califano, 572 F.2d 908, 912 (2d Cir.1978); Gold v. Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, 463 F.2d 38, 42 (2d Cir.1972).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Rodriguez v. Schweiker
S.D.N.Y. · 1981 · confidence medium
See, e. g., Fernandez v. Schweiker, supra, at 9; Hankerson v. Harris, supra, 636 F.2d at 897 ; Eiden v. Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, 616 F.2d 63, 65 (2d Cir. 1980); Cutler v. Weinberger, 516 F.2d 1282, 1287 (2d Cir. 1975).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Claire EIDEN, Appellant,
v.
SECRETARY OF HEALTH, EDUCATION AND WELFARE, Appellee
805, Docket 79-6149.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
Feb 29, 1980.
616 F.2d 63
Toby Golick, New York City (Legal Services for the Elderly Poor), for appellant., Edward R. Korman, U. S. Atty., E. D. N. Y., Brooklyn, N. Y. (Mary McGowan Davis, Joan M. Dolan, Robert L. Begleiter, Asst. U. S. Attys., Brooklyn, N. Y., of counsel), for appellee.
Kaufman, Timbers, Werker.
Cited by 86 opinions  |  Published
IRVING R. KAUFMAN, Chief Judge:

We reverse the judgment below and remand to the Secretary for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Once again we are compelled to reverse the Secretary’s determination that a claimant is not “disabled” within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. § 423(d)(1). Although the Secretary’s decision will be affirmed when it is supported by “substantial evidence,” id. § 405(g); Richardson v. Perales, 402 U.S. 389, 401, 91 S.Ct. 1420, 1427, 28 L.Ed.2d 842 (1971), we have repeatedly stated that when “no contradictory evidence is presented, a treating physician’s expert opinion is binding on the Secretary.” Alvarado v. Califano, 605 F.2d 34, 35 (2d Cir. 1979) (per curiam); accord, Bastien v. Califano, 572 F.2d 908, 912 (2d Cir. 1978); Gold v. Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, 463 F.2d 38, 42 (2d Cir. 1972). This admonition has been ignored in this case.

Mrs. Claire Eiden left her position as a legal stenographer in 1970, and sought disability benefits for the period ending June 30, 1975, the date upon which her insurance ended. The only witness to appear before the administrative law judge (ALJ), Mrs. Eiden testified that she was often unable to move her fingers or knees, that she could not push or pull with her hands, and that she had difficulty sitting for extended periods. Moreover, she introduced a report by the physician who had treated her since 1970. Dr. Leo Parnés, an osteopath, unequivocally diagnosed Mrs. Eiden as suffering from “severe hypertrophic arthritis of the spine and extremities, with limitation of motion, spasms and pain, peripheral vascular disease with varicose veins and edema and decreased pulsations, weakness.” This diagnosis was based, according to Dr. Parnés, on EKG tracing and X-ray reports. In a subsequent letter to the Secretary, Dr. Parnés made clear his view that Mrs. Eiden had been “completely disabled since 1970.”

The ALJ, in turn, ordered a medical examination of Mrs. Eiden by Dr. Fisher. Al[*65] though Dr. Fisher found no evidence of varicosities and normal pulsations, he reported that plaintiff suffered from coronary insufficiency. He concluded that she could sit, stand, or walk only one hour each day, and that she could engage in no lifting, carrying or fine manipulation. Moreover, tests conducted by Dr. King, at the request of Dr. Fisher, found “mild to moderate enlargement of the heart, and mild pulmonary vascular congestion.”

After reviewing this evidence, the ALJ found that the “medical evidence . is insufficient to demonstrate any . impairments of sufficient severity which existed on or before June 30, 1975.” He relied on the fact that (1) Dr. Parnés provided no objective test results; (2) Mrs. Eiden had never been hospitalized; and (3) she was not examined by a physician (as distinguished from an osteopath) until he ordered an examination. Thus, he concluded that plaintiff’s evidence left the “degree of impairment ... to pure conjecture, surmise, and speculation,” and that she could “perform her regular work as a legal stenographer.” Both Magistrate Caden and Judge Neaher decided that this conclusion was supported by substantial evidence.

Our decisions in Alvarado, Bastien, and Gold compel us to reach a different conclusion. The only evidence before the Secretary detailed a number of medical findings, including Dr. Parnes’s determination that Mrs. Eiden was unable to work in 1970. Indeed, the examination conducted by the physician designated by the ALJ indicated that plaintiff could sit, stand, or walk only one hour each day, and that she could engage in no lifting, carrying, or fine manipulation. The AU’s conclusion, therefore, that Mrs. Eiden could have worked as a legal stenographer is mystifying. In the face of the testimony verifying Mrs. Eiden’s disability, the fact that no pre-1975 medical records were introduced is of no significance. There was a complete absence of contrary medical proof to the affirmative evidence of disability: “ ‘evidence bearing upon an applicant’s condition subsequent to the date [of eligibility] is pertinent evidence in that it may disclose the severity and continuity of impairments existing before.’ ” Gold v. Secretary of HEW, 463 F.2d 38, 42 (2d Cir. 1971) (quoting Carnevale v. Gardner, 393 F.2d 889, 890 (2d Cir. 1968)). Moreover, there is no requirement that medical testimony “be supported by ‘objective’ clinical or laboratory findings.” Cutler v. Weinberger, 516 F.2d 1282, 1287 (2d Cir. 1975).

In addition, the ALJ did not fulfill his affirmative obligation to assist this pro se claimant in developing her case. Gold, supra, 463 F.2d at 43; Rosenberg v. Richardson, 538 F.2d 487, 489 (2d Cir. 1976). He should, at the very least, have made an effort to elicit information concerning plaintiff’s condition prior to June 1975 — and he should have sought Dr. Fisher’s opinion on this issue. In the absence of evidence that Mrs. Eiden was not disabled in 1970, the Secretary was bound by Dr. Parnes’s expert opinion. Accordingly, this case is remanded to the Secretary so that he can either award benefits or seek additional proof concerning plaintiff’s pre-1975 condition. See Alvarado, supra, 605 F.2d at 35.