Nance v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner

Nance applied for Social Security disability benefits, alleging severe physical impairments. An Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) denied the claim after a hearing, finding that Nance retained the residual functional capacity to perform other work existing in the national economy. The Appeals Council declined review, and the United States District Court affirmed the Commissioner's final decision. Nance appealed to the Eleventh Circuit, arguing that the ALJ improperly discredited his subjective pain complaints and failed to accord proper weight to certain medical opinions. The court examined the record to determine whether the denial was supported by substantial evidence. On August 31, 2018, the appellate court issued its ruling, concluding that the ALJ had adequately articulated specific reasons for discounting Nance's testimony and had properly weighed the medical evidence, and therefore the Commissioner's decision must stand.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court's judgment and upheld the Commissioner's denial of disability benefits, holding that the ALJ's decision was supported by substantial evidence.

Whether the Administrative Law Judge properly evaluated the claimant's subjective reports of pain and functional limitations, and whether the ALJ correctly weighed the relevant medical opinion evidence under the applicable regulations.

The decision reinforced the deferential substantial evidence standard applied by federal courts when reviewing Social Security disability determinations. It underscored that ALJs have broad discretion to assess a claimant's credibility and to resolve conflicts in the medical record, as long as the findings are clearly articulated and based on the record as a whole.