Galm v. Eaton Corporation - Northern District of Iowa

Record at 001637.
record that:
[T]here is no objective evidence of a neurologic or orthopedic
functional impairment based on disease of the cervical,
thoracic or lumbosacral spine which would preclude the
claimant from performing “any occupation.” There is no
demonstrable evidence by examination or by functional
capacity evaluation that the claimant has significantly restricted
endurance for sitting, standing and/or walking, despite her
complaints to the contrary. Also, there is no demonstrable
evidence of significant functional impairment with respect to
cognition, speech, or use of upper extremities.
Dr. Glassman, a psychiatrist, concluded from his review of the administrative
Record at 001642.
The medical record does not support a psychiatric illness of an
incapacitating nature. The claimant has not been under formal
psychiatric or psychological treatment for the diagnosis of
depression. Evaluation performed in the Mayo Clinic,
December 2000 made a diagnosis of major depressive
disorder. The diagnosis itself does not note incapacity and
there is no supporting documentation that describes functional
impairments that would indicate incapacity.
Dr. Burstein, a psychologist, reached a similar conclusion from his review of the
documentation provided to him, that this documentation did not show evidence of a
functional impairment which would preclude Galm from working:
[T]he documentation provided for review does not show
evidence of impairments in psychological functioning which
would preclude Ms. Galm from performing work. As
indicated, Ms. Galm has not sought out formal psychological
or psychiatric treatment. While she did have a consultation
with a psychiatrist and a psychologist, these consultations were
part of a complete physical workup rather than as part of an
12