List 12.05C – Mild Mental Retardation

One of the best cases I’ve found in researching the issue of mild mental retardation is Yates v. Astrue, 2009 U.S. Dist.Lexis 76141 (M.D.Tenn. Aug. 10, 2009).  I’ve written previous posts on mild mental retardation because I have seen cases that should have been approved get denied because the ALJ doesn’t think the person is really mentally retarded.  The Yates case demonstrates why it is improper to attempt to judge the claimant based on certain assumptions.  For example, in Yates, the Court noted that it was improper to discount IQ scores on the basis that they are perceived to be inconsistent with the claimant’s past work history:  “The ALJ’s statement that the plaintiff’s employment in a semi-skilled, medium exertion job over the prior sixteen years was not indicative of an individual with mental retardation is inaccurate.”   Moreover, “a valid IQ score of 68 was [is] not mutually exclusive of the plaintiff’s ability and independence to complete daily activities.” Citing: Brown v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 948 F.2d 268 (6th Cir. 1991).  In the Yates case, the Court noted that, “the ALJ’s finding that the plaintiff did not suffer from mild mental retardation because of his daily activities is simply incorrect.”


About tngainjurylawyer
Serious Injury Lawyer in Tennessee and Georgia.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: