MacNeil v. Social Security Administration

Filing 23

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge is SUSTAINED, ADOPTED, and INCORPORATED herein. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the decision of the Commissioner denying Plaintiffs appl ication for supplemental security income under Title XVI of the Social Security Act is REVERSED and this case is REMANDED to the Commissioner for consideration of steps two through five of the sequential evaluation process. A separate Judgment shall accompany this Memorandum and Order. Signed by District Judge Audrey G. Fleissig on 12/19/2013. (RAK)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
)
BRIAN J. MACNEIL,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
Case No. 4:12CV01756 AGF/TCM
)
CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting
)
Commissioner of Social Security,
)
)
Defendant.
)

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Currently before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of United States
Magistrate Judge Thomas C. Mummert, III, to whom this matter was referred for
recommended disposition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). This is an action under 42
U.S.C. § 405(g) for judicial review of the final decision of the Acting Commissioner
(“Commissioner”) of Social Security, denying the application of Plaintiff Brian MacNeil
for supplemental security income under Title XVI of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C.
§ 1381-1383b. Plaintiff alleged in his application that he has been disabled since birth by
attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, static encephalopathy, mild mental retardation,
and palsy.
The Administrative Law Judge found at step one in the sequential evaluation
process that Plaintiff performed work at substantial gainful activity levels. Plaintiff
argued in his brief to the Court that the ALJ erred in failing to consider the evidence that
Plaintiff was able to maintain his employment only because he worked under “special

conditions,” such that the presumption of substantial gainful activity was negated. The
Magistrate Judge agreed with Plaintiff and recommends that the decision of the
Commissioner be reversed and the case be remanded for consideration of steps two
through five of the sequential evaluation process.
The Commisioner objects on the ground that the Magistrate Judge was incorrect in
stating that the ALJ determined that there were “no special conditions” when the ALJ
acknowledged that Plaintiff was assisted by a job coach. The Commissioner also
maintains that the Magistrate Judge “reweighs” the record evidence, which is not the
province of the courts.
Upon careful consideration of the Report and Recommendation and the record in
this case, the Court concurs with the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge that the
Commissioner’s decision should be reversed and the case remanded. As the Magistrate
Judge noted, the ALJ discounted the job coaching services based only Plaintiff’s
testimony, which was inherently unreliable on this matter, and disregarded of all the other
evidence of “special conditions.”
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of the United
States Magistrate Judge is SUSTAINED, ADOPTED, and INCORPORATED herein.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the decision of the Commissioner denying
Plaintiff’s application for supplemental security income under Title XVI of the Social
Security Act is REVERSED and this case is REMANDED to the Commissioner for
consideration of steps two through five of the sequential evaluation process.
2

A separate Judgment shall accompany this Memorandum and Order.

_______________________________
AUDREY G. FLEISSIG
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated this 19th day of December, 2013.

3