FUDGE v. BERRYHILL

No. A-16-CV-908-AWA.

MARJORIE ELAINE FUDGE, v. NANCY A. BERRYHILL, ACTING COMMISSIONER OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION.

United States District Court, W.D. Texas, Austin Division.

Editors Note
Applicable Law: 42 U.S.C. § 405
Cause: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
Nature of Suit: 863 Social Security: DIWC / DIWW
Source: PACER


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Marjorie Elaine Fudge, Plaintiff, represented by Karl E. Osterhout , Osterhout Disability Law, LLC.

Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant, represented by Roberta Gene Bowie , Office of the General Counsel, Region VI.


MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER OF REMAND

ANDREW W. AUSTIN, Magistrate Judge.

After consideration of Defendant's Unopposed Motion to Reverse with Remand and Enter Judgment (Dkt. No. 19), the Court finds that the Motion is well-taken and should be granted. Therefore, the Court, ORDERS the above-captioned matter REVERSED and REMANDED under the fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) to the Commissioner of Social Security for the purpose of conducting further administrative proceedings.

The Court finds that a sentence four remand under § 405(g) is appropriate in this case in order to ensure that the Commissioner properly considers Plaintiff's claim of disability. See Buckner v. Apfel, 213 F.3d 1006, 1010 (8th Cir. 2000) (finding that district court's remand should have been pursuant to sentence four, where purpose of the remand was to prompt additional fact finding and further evaluation of the existing facts); Morris v. Apfel, 14 F.Supp.2d 1134, 1135 (D. Neb. 1998) (sentence four remand appropriate where government conceded that remand was necessary to ensure proper consideration of plaintiff's claim, and where Appeals Council failed to address certain medical evidence). On remand, an ALJ will evaluate the onset, severity, and limiting effects of Plaintiff's mental impairments, with particular attention to the medical opinion evidence regarding these issues.

A district court remanding a case pursuant to sentence four of § 405(g) must enter judgment in the case, and may not retain jurisdiction over the administrative proceedings on remand. Shalala v. Shaefer, 509 U.S. 292, 297 (1993); Istre v. Apfel, 208 F.3d 517, 520-521 (5th Cir. 2000) (a sentence four remand must include a substantive ruling affirming, modifying or reversing the Secretary's decision). Therefore, IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk ENTER JUDGMENT in this case on behalf of the Plaintiff and that the Clerk's Office CLOSE this cause of action.


Comment

1000 Characters Remaining

Leagle.com reserves the right to edit or remove comments but is under no obligation to do so, or to explain individual moderation decisions.

User Comments

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases