Moore v. Astrue, No. 10-1126

Social Security Benefit Denial

In Moore v. Astrue, No. 10-1126,  plaintiff's appeals of a decision of a district court affirming the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security to deny his applications for supplemental security income, the court affirmed where 1) there was medical evidence to support the alternative position taken by the ALJ that plaintiff could handle interactions with coworkers on an "infrequent" basis; 2) there was substantial evidence to support the ALJ's determination that plaintiff could "adapt to infrequent work changes" and perform "simple, routine and repetitive work activity"; and 3) there was no direct conflict between "carrying out simple job instructions" for "simple, routine and repetitive work activity," as in the hypothetical, and the vocational expert's identification of occupations involving instructions that, while potentially detailed, were not complicated or intricate.

As the court wrote:  "Sebastian Moore appeals the decision of the district court affirming the
decision of the Commissioner of Social Security to deny his applications for supplemental security income. For the reasons discussed below, we affirm."

Related Resources

• Read the Eighth Circuit's Decision in Moore v. Astrue, No. 10-1126