Hartley v. Social Security Administration Commissioner
Filing
14
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) as set forth in the 13 Memorandum Opinion. Signed by Honorable Mark E. Ford on March 27, 2017. (hnc)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
FORT SMITH DIVISION
ANDREW HARTLEY
PLAINTIFF
v.
CIVIL NO. 2:16-cv-2199-MEF
NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting
Commissioner Social Security Administration1
DEFENDANT
JUDGMENT
For reasons stated in a memorandum opinion of this date, we conclude that the decision of
the Commissioner denying benefits to the Plaintiff is not supported by substantial evidence and
should be reversed and remanded for further consideration pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C.
§ 405(g). The parties have sixty days from entry of the judgment on the docket in which to
appeal.
If Plaintiff wishes to request an award of attorney’s fees and cost under the Equal Access
to Justice Act (EAJA) 28 U.S.C. § 2412, an application may be filed up until 30 days after the
judgment becomes “not appealable” i.e., 30 days after the 60-day time for appeal has ended. See
Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292, 296 (1993); 28 U.S.C. §§ 2412(d)(1)(B), (d)(2)(G).
IT IS SO ORDERED AND ADJUDGED this 27th day of March, 2017.
/s/ Mark E. Ford
HON. MARK E. FORD
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
1
Nancy A. Berryhill is now the Acting Commissioner of Social Security. Pursuant to Rule 25(d) of the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure, Nancy A. Berryhill should be substituted for Acting Commissioner Carolyn W. Colvin as
the defendant in this suit. No further action needs to be taken to continue this suit by reason of the last sentence of
section 205(g) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).
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?