ROBERT L. GARNER, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
MARGARET M. HECKLER, SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, DEFENDANT-APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the Secretary erred in mechanically applying age grids without considering the claimant's ability to adapt.
Garner appealed the denial of disability benefits, arguing the Secretary incorrectly classified him as a 'younger individual' based on age grids. The …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Substantial Evidence Standard cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
Garner appealed the district court’s af-firmance of the Secretary’s denial of disability insurance benefits. The sole question on appeal is whether the Secretary erred in treating Garner, age 49 and 10 months at the time of the AU’s determination, as a younger individual (45-49) rather than as a person closely approaching advanced age (50-54).
The Secretary asserts that testimony by a vocational expert provides substantial evidence for the ALJ’s finding that claimant is a younger individual. However, the ex pert’s testimony concerning claimant’s capacity was based on the predicate that Garner was a younger individual.
In Broz v. Schweiker, 677 F. 2d 1351 (11th Cir.1982), vacated and remanded sub nom. Heckler v. Broz, — U.S. —, 103 S.Ct. 2421, 77 L.Ed.2d 1311, adhered to, 711 F. 2d 957, modified, 721 F. 2d 1297 (11th Cir.1983), we held that the Secretary could not use the grids the Secretary had adopted concerning age to establish conclusively a claimant’s ability to adapt. Broz I, 677 F. 2d at 1360. We explained how the Secretary could use the age grids in establishing the claimant’s ability to adapt in Reeves v. Heckler, 734 F. 2d 519 (11th Cir.1984). The evidentiary determination we outlined in Reeves has not been made in this case. The record indicates that the ALJ applied the age grids mechanically. The case must be remanded for Garner to be given an opportunity to make a proffer to the district court on his ability to adapt. If he makes such a proffer, the district court should remand to the Secretary for further consideration of this issue. If the claimant fails to make such a proffer, the ALJ’s mechanistic use of the grids would be harmless error and there would be no need to remand to the Secretary.
VACATED and REMANDED.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Hutchison v. Bowen, 787 F.2d 1461 (11th Cir. 1986)…roducing substantial evidence of a lesser ability to adapt. Reeves v. Heckler, 734 F. 2d at 526. We hold that he failed to meet this burden. Appellant alleges that the Secretary mechanically applied the age factor in violation of Garner v. Heckler, 735 F. 2d 1291 (11th Cir.1984). While we do not hold that the application here was within the scope of that labelled by Gamer as mechanical, as the claimant failed on remand to make a Reeves proffer any alleged mechanistic use of the grids would be harmless error.…1 / 2
Authorities Cited
- Dirven D. Reeves v. Heckler, 734 F.2d 519 (11th Cir. 1984)
- Broz v. Schweiker, 677 F.2d 1351 (11th Cir. 1982)
- Broz v. Heckler, 711 F.2d 957 (11th Cir. 1983)
- Broz v. Heckler, 721 F.2d 1297 (11th Cir. 1983)