Pickett v. Colvin

Filing 16

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 14 Report and Recommendations, 11 Motion to Affirm filed by Carolyn W. Colvin, 7 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Tracy Pickett. Signed by District Judge Tom S. Lee on 1/31/17.(TLC)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI NORTHERN DIVISION TRACY PICKETT ON BEHALF OF K.H. PLAINTIFF VS. CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:15CV700TSL-LRA CAROLYN W. COLVIN, ACTING COMMISSIONER SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION DEFENDANT ORDER This cause is before the court on the magistrate judge’s January 6, 2017 report and recommendation, recommending that plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment be granted to the extent that she seeks reversal of the commissioner’s decision and remand to the commissioner for further consideration and that the government’s motion for an order affirming the commissioner’s decision be denied. The government having advised that it has no objection and the court having reviewed the report and recommendation, the court will adopt, as its own opinion, the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. Based on the foregoing, it is ordered that the report and recommendation of United States Linda R. Anderson entered on or about January 6, 2017, be, and the same is hereby, adopted as the finding of this court. It is further ordered that plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment is granted such that the commissioner’s decision is reversed and the case is remanded for further administrative proceedings consistent with the court’s opinion. It is further ordered that the government’s motion for an order affirming the commissioner’s decision is denied. A separate judgment will be entered in accordance with Rule 58 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. SO ORDERED this 31st day of January, 2017. /s/ Tom S. Lee UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2

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?