Wiggins v. Social Security Administration Commissioner
Filing
16
FINAL JUDGMENT REVERSING THE DECISION OF THE COMMISSIONER AND REMANDING THIS CASE TO THE COMMISSIONER FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION PURSUANT TO SENTENCE FOUR of 42 U.S.C. 405(g). Signed by Honorable Mark E. Ford on September 30, 2016. (hnc)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
FORT SMITH DIVISION
DOLORES D. WIGGINS
V.
PLAINTIFF
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:16-CV-2002-MEF
CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Commissioner,
Social Security Administration
DEFENDANT
FINAL JUDGMENT
This cause is before the Court on the Plaintiff’s complaint for judicial review of an
unfavorable final decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration denying her
claim for disability 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). The Court, having reviewed
the administrative record, the briefs of the parties, the applicable law, and having heard oral
argument, finds as follows, to-wit:
Consistent with the Court’s ruling from the bench following the parties’ oral argument, the
decision of the Commissioner of Social Security is reversed and remanded for further proceedings
pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).
The Court finds that remand is necessary to allow the Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”)
to reconsider his credibility determination. The ALJ concluded the Plaintiff exhibited a pattern of
behavior for which she should be discredited, which was not based on good reasons and substantial
evidence on the record as a whole. On remand, the ALJ is ordered to examine and apply the five
factors from Polaski v Heckler, 739 F.2d 1320 (8th Cir. 1984) in light of the Plaintiff’s subjective
complaints and make a new credibility determination articulating any reasons for discrediting the
testimony and addressing any inconsistencies.
The Court finds that the ALJ’s Residual Functional Capacity (“RFC”) determination was
not based on substantial evidence on the record as a whole, and that the matter must be remanded
for further development of the record regarding the limitations imposed by the Plaintiff’s
peripheral neuropathy. On remand, the ALJ is ordered to obtain a consultative examination from
a neurologist, complete with an RFC assessment. The ALJ should request specific information
concerning the impact of the Plaintiff’s peripheral neuropathy on her ability to perform basic work
activities, including her ability to sit, stand, and walk for extended periods of time, and the extent
of her exertional and non-exertional limitations.
With this evidence, the ALJ shall then re-evaluate the Plaintiff’s RFC and include any
limitations supported by the record in an appropriate hypothetical question posed to a vocational
expert to determine whether the Plaintiff can perform jobs that exist in significant numbers in the
national economy.
IT IS SO ORDERED AND ADJUDGED on this the 30th day of September, 2016.
/s/ Mark E. Ford
HON. MARK E. FORD
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
2
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?