Cox ex rel. Cox v. Social Security Administration, 3:18-cv-165-DPM. (2018)
Court: District Court, E.D. Arkansas
Number: infdco20181224609
Visitors: 13
Filed: Dec. 21, 2018
Latest Update: Dec. 21, 2018
Summary: ORDER D.P. MARSHALL, JR. , District Judge . On de novo review, the Court adopts Magistrate Judge Harris's recommendation, No. 13, and overrules Cox's objections, No. 14. FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(3). Cox isn't a survivor who can recover her son's benefits. 20 C.F.R. 416.542(b)(2). And there's no legal basis to award her the expenses she incurred in dutifully taking care of her son. The Court understands her frustrations with the system for disability benefits, as well as with her son's lawy
Summary: ORDER D.P. MARSHALL, JR. , District Judge . On de novo review, the Court adopts Magistrate Judge Harris's recommendation, No. 13, and overrules Cox's objections, No. 14. FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(3). Cox isn't a survivor who can recover her son's benefits. 20 C.F.R. 416.542(b)(2). And there's no legal basis to award her the expenses she incurred in dutifully taking care of her son. The Court understands her frustrations with the system for disability benefits, as well as with her son's lawye..
More
ORDER
D.P. MARSHALL, JR., District Judge.
On de novo review, the Court adopts Magistrate Judge Harris's recommendation, No. 13, and overrules Cox's objections, No. 14. FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(3). Cox isn't a survivor who can recover her son's benefits. 20 C.F.R. § 416.542(b)(2). And there's no legal basis to award her the expenses she incurred in dutifully taking care of her son. The Court understands her frustrations with the system for disability benefits, as well as with her son's lawyers. The Court, however, must follow the governing law. The motion, No. 8, is granted. This case will be dismissed without prejudice.
So Ordered.
Source: Leagle
