Case Explained: Non-Argument Calendar LAHAROLD WOODHOUSE v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit Filed: 2026-06-23 Docket: 8:24-cv-00995-CPT The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the District Court’s decision upholding the Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of Disability Insurance Benefits to Laharold Woodhouse. The court applied the “substantial evidence” standard, which requires that the administrative record contain relevant evidence a reasonable person would accept as adequate to support the conclusion, and reviewed legal conclusions de novo. The central issue addressed was whether the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) erred by failing to explicitly discuss the limiting effects of Woodhouse’s severe migraine headaches when calculating his residual functional capacity (RFC). The court acknowledged that an ALJ must address properly alleged severe impairments but found that the ALJ did not ignore Woodhouse’s migraines, having referenced them over twenty times in the decision. The court held that the ALJ’s conclusion—that Woodhouse’s subjective complaints regarding the intensity of his limitations were inconsistent with the medical evidence—was supported by substantial evidence. This evidence included a lack of medication refills after July 2022, self-reports of headaches occurring only once a week, and testimony that medication eradicated pain within minutes. Furthermore, the record showed Woodhouse engaged in significant physical activities, such as riding a bike, playing golf, driving, operating a travel business, and traveling to Greece. The court rejected Woodhouse’s argument that the ALJ failed to construct a “logical bridge” between the impairment discussion and the RFC conclusion, noting that the opposing evidence was copious while the evidence supporting Woodhouse’s claims was limited. As a result of this affirmation, the Commissioner’s final decision denying benefits remains in effect, and Woodhouse is not entitled to Disability Insurance Benefits under the Social Security Act. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.