Galm v. Eaton Corporation - Northern District of Iowa

y depression and/or narcotic dependence.
Record at 001354. Thus, four peer review physicians and the one peer review
psychologist all concluded that Galm was not disabled under the “any occupation”
requirement of the Plan.
On April 20, 2001, Rick Ostrander, a vocational expert, administered a vocational
rehabilitation evaluation on Galm, apparently done in order to buttress her claim for Social
Security Disability Benefits, and concluded that: “Janet Galm is not employable in any
capacity on a regular basis. Her limitations and restrictions from work are so severe as
to preclude any type of regular gainful employment.” Record at 000115. Ostrander
evaluated Galm again on September 21, 2001, in order to address vocational issues as they
related to Galm’s claim for Social Security Disability Benefits. Ostrander concluded:
Record at 000195.
There is no work existing in significant numbers in the region
or national economy that will allow Janet Galm to earn at least
$740.00 per month. She has been essentially limited to work
that allows her to vary her sitting and standing and avoid
repetitive activity and twisting and turning, which would be a
very restricted range of light and sedentary work.
Additionally, she has been restricted to 4 hours of work per
day. Given her lack of transferable skills, Janet would
reasonably be regulated to unskilled, entry level work on a
part-time basis, which fits within her physical restrictions.
There is no work in existence that would allow her to be
employed in this capacity and earn at or above $740.00 per
month.
Ostrander conducted a follow up with Galm on October 14, 2002 and issued a
report on October 18, 2002, in which he found:
Given this medical history and frequency of treatment for
debilitating migraine headaches, it is my opinion that Janet
14