Cromwell v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration
Filing
25
ORDER granting 23 Motion to Remand. The Court REVERSES the Commissioner's decision in this matter under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), and remands the case to the Commissioner for further administrative proceedings. Signed by Honorable Bruce Howe Hendricks on 11/2/2016.(gnan )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
FLORENCE DIVISION
) Civil Action No.: 4:15-4117-BHH
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v.
)
ORDER
)
Carolyn W. Colvin, Acting Commission of
)
Social Security
)
)
Defendant. )
___________________________________ )
Margaret McFadden Cromwell,
Defendant, Carolyn W. Colvin, Acting Commissioner of Social Security moves
pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for this Court to enter judgment with an
order of reversal with remand of the cause to the Commissioner for further administrative
proceedings. See Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292 (1993). Plaintiff consents to
Defendant’s motion. Upon consideration, Defendant’s motion, (ECF No. 23), is GRANTED.
The Court hereby REVERSES the Commissioner's decision in this matter under sentence
four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g),1 and REMANDS the case to the Commissioner for further
administrative proceedings.
On remand, the ALJ should specifically: (1) consider Plaintiff’s residual functional
capacity; (2) evaluate the physical demands of Plaintiff’s past relevant work; (3) compare
Plaintiff’s residual functional capacity with the function demands of her past relevant work,
and if warranted, consideration of whether there is other work in the national economy in
significant numbers that Plaintiff can perform given her residual functional capacity; and
1
The Clerk of Court will enter a separate judgment pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure, Rule 58.
(4) issue a new decision.
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/ Bruce Howe Hendricks
United States District Judge
November 2, 2016
Greenville, South Carolina
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?