# Brown v. Commissioner Social Security Administration

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · September 29, 2017 · 873 F.3d 251

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9878662

## Case

- **Full name:** Ricky E. BROWN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. COMMISSIONER SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Defendant-Appellee
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** September 29, 2017
- **Citations:** 873 F.3d 251; 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 18856; 2017 WL 4320263
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Niemeyer
- **Judges:** Niemeyer, King, Wynn
- **Cited by:** 604 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9878662

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- finding error when the ALJ identified activities of daily living Plaintiff performed but failed to acknowledge “the extent of those activities” or any explanation “as to how those particular activities—or any of the activities depicted by [the plaintiff]|—-showed that he could…
- holding an ALJ erred by discrediting a claimant’s symptom testimony based on “daily activities” where the “ALJ did not acknowledge the extent of those activities” and “provided no explanation as to how those particular activities . . . showed that he could persist through an e…
- finding that statement by ALJ that claimant’s daily activities supported an adverse credibility determination was insufficient when AL] failed to note limited extent of the activities or explain how they showed he could sustain a full-time job
- holding the ALJ erred in finding the plaintiff’s ADLs were inconsistent with his statements of pain because the ALJ did not consider the limited extent to which the plaintiff engaged in those activities; for example, the ALJ noted the plaintiff could drive but did not acknowle…
- reasoning the ALJ improperly held the applicant’s statements about his pain to be in conflict of the evidence when there was evidence he was limited in his daily activities by his pain and differentiating between “sporadic” activities and regular, daily activities

## Opinion text

NIEMEYER, Circuit Judge,
dissenting:
In denying Brown’s claim for disability benefits, the ALJ considered the medical evidence and evaluated it together with Brown’s own extensive testimony. While the ALJ concluded that Brown suffered from several impairments that could reasonably be expected to cause his alleged symptoms, he also concluded that Brown’s testimony about “the intensity, persistence and limiting effects” of those symptoms was exaggerated and materially incredible. The ALJ went into substantial detail, pointing out discrepancies between Brown’s statements and other evidence, including the objective medical evidence. At bottom, because I conclude that the ALJ’s conclusions were supported by substantial evidence, I would affirm.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9878662. Public record. Not legal advice.