Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Watson v. Commissioner of Social Security, 1:17cv00099-JMV. (2018)

Court: District Court, N.D. Mississippi Number: infdco20181002k40 Visitors: 14
Filed: Sep. 28, 2018
Latest Update: Sep. 28, 2018
Summary: FINAL JUDGMENT JANE M. VIRDEN , Magistrate Judge . This cause is before the court on Plaintiff's complaint for judicial review of an unfavorable final decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration denying a claim for supplemental security income benefits. The parties have consented to entry of final judgment by the United States Magistrate Judge under the provisions of 28 U.S.C. 636(c), with any appeal to the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. The court, having
More

FINAL JUDGMENT

This cause is before the court on Plaintiff's complaint for judicial review of an unfavorable final decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration denying a claim for supplemental security income benefits. The parties have consented to entry of final judgment by the United States Magistrate Judge under the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), with any appeal to the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. The court, having reviewed the administrative record, the briefs of the parties, and the applicable law, and having heard oral argument, finds as follows:

Consistent with the Memorandum Opinion issued this day, the court finds the ALJ's decision is not supported by substantial evidence in the record. On remand, the ALJ shall fully and properly consider and weigh the opinion of Dr. Austin. To the extent the ALJ finds Dr. Austin's opinions require further explanation or clarification, the ALJ must recontact Dr. Austin. Additionally, the ALJ will fully consider and discuss the statistical relevance of the scores included in Dr. Austin's report. Further, the ALJ must enlist the assistance of a medical advisor(s) who shall review all of the medical evidence, school records, and standardized test scores in the file and provide an opinion on the issue of whether the claimant met, medically equaled, or functionally equaled a listed impairment. The ALJ may conduct any additional proceedings not inconsistent with this order and must ultimately issue a new decision.

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that this case is REVERSED AND REMANDED for further proceedings.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer