Strabley v. Social Security Administration Commissioner
FINAL JUDGMENT ADJUDGING THE DECISION OF THE COMMISSIONER and Plaintiffs case is dismissed with prejudice. Signed by Honorable Mark E. Ford on November 2, 2016. (rw)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
FORT SMITH DIVISION
MICHAEL M. STRABLEY
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:16-cv-2053-MEF
CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Commissioner,
Social Security Administration
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 his
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).
On remand, the ALJ is directed to order a current orthopedic consultative examination with
an RFC assessment. Upon completion, the ALJ is to reconsider the RFC. If the ALJ chooses to
discount Dr. Wellman’s opinion or the opinion of the new consultative examiner, the ALJ should
set forth in detail his reasons for doing so. Upon reconsideration of the RFC, the ALJ should
formulate appropriate hypothetical questions to present to the vocational expert in order to
determine if Mr. Strabley can return to past relevant work or if there are other jobs in significant
numbers in the economy that he can perform.
IT IS SO ORDERED AND ADJUDGED on this the 2nd day of November, 2016.
/s/ Mark E. Ford
HON. MARK E. FORD
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
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?