Diagnosis not Required to Meet Listing

In Pedro v. Astrue, 848 F.Supp.2d 1006 (D.Ore. 2011), the District Court rejected the Commissioner’s argument that a claimant could not meet a Listing for mental retardation if she was not diagnosed with such a condition.  The Judge reviewed relevant case law, and concluded: “the regulation itself does not require a diagnosis . . . .  I conclude that plaintiff is not required to have a diagnosis of mental retardation to satisfy Listing 12.05C.”  Of course, the claimant must still meet the diagnostic requirements of the Listing.


About tngainjurylawyer
Serious Injury Lawyer in Tennessee and Georgia.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: