top of page

11th Circuit Remand in Wheeler Reinforces SSR 96‑8p Requirements

  • juliana9396
  • Jul 7
  • 2 min read

Social security disability case SSR 96-8p

⚖️ The Critical Issue in Wheeler


  • Omitted moderate limitations: Dr. Austin, a consulting psychologist, identified moderate restrictions in interacting with supervisors and coworkers.

  • ALJ’s RFC oversight: The Administrative Law Judge didn’t include these limitations in the residual functional capacity (RFC) determination.

  • No explanation given: SSR 96‎-8p requires an ALJ to explain why they diverge from medical source opinions—which was absent, resulting in reversal and remand.


💡 Key Takeaways for Practitioners


  1. Include every medical limitation

    • Even moderate restrictions count.

    • A “moderate” limitation can materially affect a claimant’s ability to work.

  2. Follow SSR 96‎-8p rigorously

    • Any discrepancy between RFC and medical opinions needs a clear ALJ justification.

    • Without this, decisions risk being vacated.

  3. Ensure logical consistency

    • The RFC must be clearly rooted in the medical record.

    • Courts won’t re‎-weigh evidence but will look for a logical evidentiary chain.


👩‍⚖️ Questions & Answers


Q: What does "moderate limitation" mean in disability cases?

A: It’s more than minimal—it may significantly impact a person’s ability to perform work‎-related tasks, especially in social interactions or supervision.


Q: What does SSR 96‎-8p require when ALJ and medical opinions conflict?

A: If the ALJ’s RFC differs from a medical opinion, the ALJ must explain why that opinion was not adopted—otherwise, it’s reversible error.


Q: Will courts re‎-evaluate the evidence on appeal?

A: No, courts apply the substantial evidence standard. They check if the ALJ’s conclusion logically follows from the record—but do not re‎-weigh facts.


🧠 Why This Matters for Disability Advocates


  • Scrutinize ALJ decisions: Every omission, even small, can lead to remand.

  • Support strong RFC narratives: Document moderate limitations thoroughly and be ready to challenge ALJ rationales.

  • Reference pertinent SSRs: SSR 96‎-8p is foundational and non‎-negotiable.


🔗 Relevant Tower Law Group Resources

✅ Final Thoughts

Wheeler is a strong reminder: even “small” procedural errors like missing a moderate limitation can upend an ALJ’s decision. For advocates, it underlines the importance of rigorously checking RFCs, demanding full ALJ explanations, and citing critical SSRs like 96‎-8p in appeals.


Got any questions? Schedule a consultation with us. I’m here to help. It’s a lot to take in, but we’ll get through it together. After all, navigating these waters is always easier when you’ve got someone to chat with.

Comments


TLG Logo White
Phone Icon - TLG Yellow
IG Logo - Gold
Facebook Logo - Gold
TLG X Logo
TLG Linked In Footer Logo

FLORIDA

800 Executive Drive,

Oviedo, FL 32765

6900 Tavistock Lakes Blvd Suite 400, Orlando, FL 32827

STAY UP TO DATE

Subscribe to our newsletter and stay up to date with Tower Law Group.

INDIANA

201 N. Illinois St.

16th Floor - South Tower

Indianapolis, IN 46204

Copyright © 2025 Tower Law Group All Rights Reserved | Privacy Policy  | Disclaimer  | Law Firm Accessibility Statement  |  Terms of Use

 

LEGAL DISCLAIMER: 

We appreciate your interest in Tower Law Group. Please know that our website is provided for informational purposes only. It should not be considered legal advice and visitors to our website should not take action upon this information without first discussing it with a legal professional.

 

Your visit to this website or transmission of information does not create an attorney-client relationship with Tower Law Group generally, or any of its attorneys. If you wish to contact anyone at Tower Law Group please do not disclose any information that you consider to be confidential in that communication. Before an attorney-client relationship can be established, an attorney from Tower Law Group will need to confirm that the firm does not already represent another entity involved in the matter and that the firm is willing to accept representation.

 

Tower Law Group will regard any information or materials you transmit as confidential only after this confirmation by the firm to you that it is willing to accept representation. Until such time, all unsolicited inquiries or information received by Tower Law Group will not be regarded as confidential, even if considered confidential by you, and will not preclude the firm from accepting representation of other entities that may be adverse to your interests.

bottom of page