Hughes v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 15

FINAL JUDGMENT in favor of Gregory Hughes against Commissioner of Social Security. The case is remanded for further proceedings. CASE CLOSED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jane M. Virden on 3/26/15. (ncb)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI
OXFORD DIVISION

GREGORY HUGHES

PLAINTIFF

V.

NO. 3:14CV00159-JMV

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY

DEFENDANT

FINAL JUDGMENT
This cause is before the court on Plaintiff’s complaint for judicial review of an
unfavorable final decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration denying
claims for a period of disability and Disability Insurance Benefits and Supplemental Security
Income. 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), with any appeal to the Court of Appeals for
the Fifth Circuit. The court, having reviewed the administrative record, the briefs of the parties,
and the applicable law and having heard oral argument, finds as follows, to-wit:
Consistent with the court’s ruling from the bench during oral argument, the court finds
the ALJ’s residual functional capacity (“RFC”) determination is not supported by substantial
evidence in the record. Specifically, the ALJ failed–though attributing great weight to the
medical source statement of Dr. Bruce Randolph–to include in the claimant’s RFC Dr.
Randolph’s assessment that the claimant could only stand for fifteen minutes without
interruption and sit forty-five minutes without interruption. Thus, the ALJ effectively rejected
these limitations without any explanation. Additionally, the court finds nothing in the record to
indicate the ALJ considered what effect, if any, the claimant’s polycystic kidney
disease–documented by a September 2013 MRI–had on his ability to work. On remand, the ALJ

shall consider the claimant’s polycystic kidney disease and determine what effect, if any, it has
on the claimant’s ability to perform work activity. Also, the ALJ shall reconsider Dr.
Randolph’s opinion and either adopt the standing and sitting limitations noted above or fully
explain why they should not be adopted. After considering all of the evidence, the ALJ shall
reconsider the claimant’s RFC. If necessary, the ALJ shall obtain additional testimony from a
vocational expert in order to determine whether there is any work the claimant can perform in
light of his RFC and other important vocational factors. The ALJ may conduct any additional
proceedings that are not inconsistent with this order.
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that this case is REVERSED
and REMANDED for further proceedings.
This, the 26th day of March, 2015.

/s/ Jane M. Virden
U. S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE

-2-