Hessert v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner

Plaintiff Hessert applied for Social Security disability benefits, asserting that severe physical and mental impairments prevented them from maintaining substantial gainful employment. The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) denied the claim, finding that Hessert retained the residual functional capacity (RFC) to adjust to other work existing in the national economy. Hessert appealed the Acting Commissioner's final decision to the United States District Court. The court evaluated whether the ALJ's decision was supported by substantial evidence and whether proper legal standards were applied. The judicial review focused heavily on the ALJ's assessment of medical opinions. On September 24, 2018, the court concluded that the ALJ failed to properly articulate the weight given to the medical evidence or provide sufficient reasoning under the applicable regulations, necessitating a remand.

The United States District Court ruled in favor of the Plaintiff. The Acting Commissioner's final decision was vacated, and the case was remanded to the Social Security Administration for further administrative proceedings, requiring a new hearing and a proper evaluation of the medical evidence.

The primary dispute was whether the Administrative Law Judge failed to properly evaluate the medical opinion evidence from treating sources and whether the resulting Residual Functional Capacity (RFC) assessment was supported by substantial evidence.

This case underscores the strict procedural requirements that Administrative Law Judges must follow when evaluating medical evidence in Social Security disability cases. It highlights the judiciary's role in enforcing the "treating physician rule" and ensuring claimants receive fair hearings, reinforcing that conclusory administrative decisions lacking substantial evidence will not withstand judicial review.