20 C.F.R. § 404.1615

Making disability determinations

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) When making a disability determination, the State agency will apply subpart P, part 404, of our regulations.

(b) The State agency will make disability determinations based only on the medical and nonmedical evidence in its files.

(1) A State agency medical or psychological consultant and a State agency disability examiner;

(2) A State agency disability examiner alone when there is no medical evidence to be evaluated (i.e., no medical evidence exists or we are unable, despite making every reasonable effort, to obtain any medical evidence that may exist) and the individual fails or refuses, without a good reason, to attend a consultative examination (see § 404.1518);

(3) A State agency disability examiner alone if the claim is adjudicated under the quick disability determination process (see § 404.1619) or the compassionate allowance process (see § 404.1602), and the initial or reconsidered determination is fully favorable to you. This paragraph (c)(3) will no longer be effective on December 28, 2018 unless we terminate it earlier by publication of a final rule in the Federal Register; or

(4) A State agency disability hearing officer.

See § 404.1616 for the definition of medical or psychological consultant and § 404.915 for the definition of disability hearing officer. The State agency disability examiner and disability hearing officer must be qualified to interpret and evaluate medical reports and other evidence relating to the claimant's physical or mental impairments and as necessary to determine the capacities of the claimant to perform substantial gainful activity. See § 404.1572 for what we mean by substantial gainful activity.

(d) The State agency will certify each determination of disability to us on forms we provide.

(e) The State agency will furnish us with all the evidence it considered in making its determination.

(f) The State agency will not be responsible for defending in court any determination made, or any procedure for making determinations, under these regulations.

[52 FR 33926, Sept. 9, 1987, as amended at 56 FR 11018, Mar. 14, 1991; 61 FR 11135, Mar. 19, 1996; 62 FR 38452, July 18, 1997; 65 FR 34958, June 1, 2000; 75 FR 62682, Oct. 13, 2010; 78 FR 66639, Nov. 6, 2013; 79 FR 51243, Aug. 28, 2014; 80 FR 63093, Oct. 19, 2015; 81 FR 73028, Oct. 24, 2016; 82 FR 5872, Jan. 18, 2017]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 45 cases (38 in the last 5 years), 1983–2026 · leading case: Stieberger v. Sullivan

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Stieberger v. Sullivan (1990) nysd “1989) and 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1615 (a), 404.1633(a) & (b), 416.”

Ostroff v. State of Fla., Dept. of Health (1983) flmd “However, 20 C.F.R. § 404.1615 (f) (1982) provides: The state agency will not be responsible for defending in court any determination made, or any procedure for making determinations, under these regulations.”

Day v. Shalala (1994) ca6 “See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1615 (c). The disability examiner must first consider the medical evidence submitted by the treating physician, as well as specialists who have treated the client, hospitals, clinics, and the like.”

Day v. Sullivan (1992) ohsd “See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1615 (c). The *808 disability examiner must first consider the medical evidence submitted by the treating physician, as well as specialists who have treated the client, hospitals, clinics, and the like.”

Jones v. Bowen (1986) ksd “20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1615 (c), 1526(b). In addition, the AU substituted his medical opinion for that of the treating physician and ignored all the evidence contrary to his previously reached finding of no disability.”

Stambaugh ex rel. Stambaugh v. Sullivan (1991) ca7 “1503 (e); 20 C.F.R. § 404.1615 (d). 20 C.F.R. § 404.”

Strapp-Pitts v. Kijakazi (2022) ilnd · cites it 2× “See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1615 (c)(1). Here, the thirteen-page forms for Vernice’s benefits at the initial level and the sixteen-page forms at the reconsideration level make up her DDEs.”

Brozek v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner of (2022) ksd

Malespin v. Commissioner of Social Security (2023) nysd

Kopec v. Commissioner of Social Security (2023) ohnd

Wroblesky v. Commissioner of Social Security (2023) ohnd

Robertson v. Commissioner of Social Security (2023) ohnd “, 20 C.F.R. § 404.1615 . 5 An RFC is an “‘assessment of’” a claimant’s ability to work, taking his or her “limitations … into account.”

Show all 45 citing cases →

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.