The Online Resource for Massachusetts Poverty Law Advocates

Morin v Colvin, Civil No. 13-cv-220-LM (Opinion No. 2014 DNH 009)

Date: 
01/23/2014
Author: 
Landya McCafferty

Remand was appropriate where the ALJ’s failed to consider an opinion from the claimant’s treating psychologist based on the incorrect inference that the psychologist’s opinion was only “countersigned” by the claimant’s treating physician.  The court rejected any negative inferences about the treating psychologist’s opinion where length of treatment and repetitive testing, as well as collaboration of the claimant’s psychologist and treating physician supported the conclusion that the psychologist’s opinion was subject to the SSA “treating physician” rule.

To save files, right click and choose 'Save Target As' or 'Save Link As'
File Attachment: 
AttachmentSize
PDF icon Morin v Colvin.PDF3.96 MB

Limit Offer