Smith v. Social Security Administration Commissioner

Filing 13

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 12 Memorandum Opinion. Signed by Honorable Mark E. Ford on April 26, 2017. (mjm)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS FORT SMITH DIVISION REBECCA D. SMITH v. PLAINTIFF CIVIL NO. 2:17-cv-2014-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 26th day of April, 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?