Larry Furr v. Commissioner of SSA
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 6:13-cv-01229-RMG Copies to all parties and the district court. [999541692]. Mailed to: Larry Fur. [14-1998]
Appeal: 14-1998
Doc: 7
Filed: 03/09/2015
Pg: 1 of 4
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-1998
LARRY CHARLES FURR,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Greenville.
Richard M. Gergel, District
Judge. (6:13-cv-01229-RMG)
Submitted:
February 27, 2015
Decided:
March 9, 2015
Before KEENAN and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Vacated and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Larry Charles Furr, Appellant Pro Se.
Barbara Murcier Bowens,
Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 14-1998
Doc: 7
Filed: 03/09/2015
Pg: 2 of 4
PER CURIAM:
Larry
insurance
(“SSI”)
Charles
Furr
benefits
benefits,
filed
(“DIB”)
claiming
applications
and
supplemental
that
he
unable to work on March 1, 2010.
by
the
Commissioner
(“Commissioner”).
of
the
had
for
disability
security
become
income
disabled
and
Both applications were denied
Social
Security
Administration
Upon Furr’s request, an administrative law
judge (“ALJ”) held a hearing, in which Furr amended the alleged
onset
date
of
his
disability
to
October
3,
2011.
After
considering the evidence, the ALJ concluded that Furr had not
been disabled for purposes of his DIB and SSI applications.
After exhausting his administrative appeal, Furr filed a
complaint in the district court.
He asserted that the decisions
of the ALJ and the Appeals Council were contrary to law and not
supported by substantial evidence.
the
magistrate
determined
judge’s
that
The district court, adopting
recommendation
substantial
over
evidence
Furr’s
objections,
supported
the
Commissioner’s decision and affirmed the denial of benefits.
Although Furr raises numerous issues for review on appeal,
we address only one.
Furr claims that the ALJ erred by deciding
his case without considering the documents constituting his SSI
application.
The Commissioner concedes, and our review of the
record before us confirms, that Furr’s SSI application is absent
from the administrative record submitted by the Commissioner to
2
Appeal: 14-1998
Doc: 7
Filed: 03/09/2015
the district court.
cannot
say
that
Pg: 3 of 4
Furthermore, after reviewing the record, we
the
SSI
application
administrative record before the ALJ.
was
included
in
the
Furr further alleges that
his SSI application included evidence of a neuropathy diagnosis,
which, if he is accurate, is inconsistent with the ALJ’s finding
that the record contained no diagnosis of neuropathy.
We “review[] the record to ensure that the ALJ’s factual
findings
are
supported
by
substantial
legal findings are free of error.”
288, 295 (4th Cir. 2013).
evidence
and
that
its
Radford v. Colvin, 734 F.3d
“A necessary predicate to engaging in
substantial evidence review is a record of the basis for the
ALJ’s ruling.”
Id.
Thus, “[i]f the reviewing court has no way
of evaluating the basis for the ALJ’s decision, then the proper
course, except in rare circumstances, is to remand to the agency
for
additional
investigation
quotation marks omitted).
fairly
develop
the
explanation.”
Id.
(internal
Additionally, “the ALJ must fully and
record
disability may be made.”
or
so
that
a
just
determination
of
Clark v. Shalala, 28 F.3d 828, 830
(8th Cir. 1994); see also Marsh v. Harris, 632 F.2d 296, 299
(4th Cir. 1980).
Based on the record before us, we conclude that the only
evidence in the administrative record that was considered by the
ALJ concerned the period of disability and impairments alleged
by Furr in his DIB application.
Although Furr’s SSI application
3
Appeal: 14-1998
Doc: 7
Filed: 03/09/2015
Pg: 4 of 4
appears to concern the same period of disability and impairments
as he alleged in his DIB application, Furr asserts that his SSI
application included evidence that was not adduced in his DIB
application and that apparently was not considered by the ALJ.
The absence of Furr’s SSI application from the administrative
and
district
Furr’s
court
allegations
records
precludes
concerning
application are accurate.
the
a
determination
evidence
from
whether
his
SSI
Due to this absence, we conclude that
the ALJ failed to adequately develop the record, and that the
record before the district court did not allow it to adequately
evaluate the basis for the ALJ’s decision.
Accordingly,
remand
the
case
we
to
vacate
the
the
district
district
court
court’s
with
order
instructions
and
to
remand the case to the agency for further proceedings consistent
with this opinion.
facts
and
materials
legal
before
We dispense with oral argument because the
contentions
are
adequately
this
and
argument
court
presented
would
not
in
the
aid
the
decisional process.
VACATED AND REMANDED
4
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?