Forrest v. Colvin

Filing 18

JUDGMENT in favor of Brenda Forrest against Social Security Administration Commissioner c/o General Counsel. The case is REMANDED for further proceedings. CASE CLOSED. Signed by Jane M Virden on 12/9/13. (ncb)

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

BRENDA FORREST

PLAINTIFF

V.

NO. 4:13CV00094-JMV

CAROLYN W. COLVIN,
Acting Commissioner of SSA

DEFENDANT
FINAL JUDGMENT

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
her claims for a period of disability, 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 following the parties’ oral argument,
the court is not convinced that the ALJ’s residual functional capacity (“RFC”) finding is
supported by substantial evidence in the record. Specifically, the RFC found by the ALJ does
not account for the opinions of Dr. Michael Whelan and Dr. Charles Small that the claimant is
unable to maintain concentration for at least two hours. Because the record in this case is
extremely voluminous, and counsel for the Commissioner acknowledges that there does not
appear to be substantial evidence to support the ALJ’s rejection of this evidence, the case will be
remanded. On remand, the ALJ shall either amend the RFC determination to include this

limitation or articulate with specificity what medical evidence from an examining or treating
source exists in the record that supports the claimant’s ability to maintain attention and
concentration sufficient to perform other work available in significant numbers in the national
economy. In either case, the ALJ shall obtain supplemental vocational expert testimony if
necessary. The ALJ may not conduct any proceedings inconsistent with this order.
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that this case is REVERSED
and REMANDED for further proceedings.
This, the 9th day of December, 2013.

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

-2-