Davis v. Astrue

Filing 21

JUDGMENT in favor of Brad Oneal Davis against Michael J. Astrue. The case is REMANDED to the Commissioner for further proceedings. CASE CLOSED. Signed by Jane M Virden on 2/15/13. (ncb)

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

BRAD ONEAL DAVIS

PLAINTIFF

VS.

CAUSE NO. 4:12CV00076-JMV

MICHAEL J. ASTRUE
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY

DEFENDANT

FINAL JUDGMENT
Pursuant to a hearing held before the undersigned United States Magistrate Judge, the
court has determined that this case should be remanded to the Commissioner of Social Security
for additional proceedings.
The court finds that the Commissioner’s decision is not supported by substantial evidence
in the record. Specifically, the ALJ relied upon the Physical Capacities Evaluation of Ms. Sylvia
Crutchfiled, C.F.N.P., in fashioning the claimant’s residual functional capacity. However, the
ALJ failed to adopt the portion of Nurse Crutchfiled’s opinion that due to chronic joint pain, the
claimant would be expected to miss more than four days of work per month–though the court
could find no other evidence in the record refuting said opinion. Additionally, though the ALJ
found the claimant’s anal warts constituted a severe impairment, nothing in the ALJ’s opinion
indicates that he fully considered the claimant’s need to take sitz baths for treatment of said
condition. Accordingly, this case is hereby remanded to the Commissioner with instructions to
refer the matter to an ALJ for reconsideration. The ALJ is directed to refer the claimant for a
consultative examination for a determination of the nature and severity of his joint impairment

and the extent of any associated limitations on his ability to work. The ALJ should also
determine the extent to which sitz baths are necessary for the treatment of the claimant’s wart
impairment and what affect, if any, said treatment has on his ability to work. Finally, the ALJ
should obtain supplemental vocational expert testimony on the issue of whether there are other
jobs the claimant can perform considering his RFC and all other relevant factors.
The parties, having 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,
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that this case is REVERSED
AND REMANDED to the Commissioner for further proceedings as set out above.
THIS 14th day of February, 2013.

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

2