Your own testimony can influence your claim for Supplemental Security Income, which is why it is crucial to reach out to a California Supplemental Security Income attorney. In a recent district court decision involving examination of plaintiff testimony, the plaintiff sought review of a denial for supplemental security income and disability insurance benefits. She was 42 and had graduated high school. She worked as an apartment manager and claimed disability as of March 2014.
The administrative law judge had used the five-step disability evaluation process. It found she had anxiety, depression, irritable bowel syndrome, fatigue syndrome, strabismus, and fibromyalgia, but that these didn’t meet or equal the listed impairments. She could do some light work and had other abilities, but couldn’t perform past relevant work. It found that there were jobs existing in significant numbers in the national economy that she could perform and that, therefore, she wasn’t disabled.
She asked the district court to review this decision. The court reasoned that where an administrative law judge decides a claimant demonstrated objective medical evidence establishing underlying impairments that could trigger the symptoms claimed and there’s no evidence of malingering, the administrative law judge could only discount the claimant’s testimony about symptom severity where he could show clear and convincing and specific substantiated reasons to do so.