Perrin v. Berryhill
Perrin v. Berryhill
Trial Court Opinion
BAN 25 □□ UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Willbw. DISTRICT OF SOUTH DAKOTA □ SOUTHERN DIVISION 2 ie oie 2k fe 2s 2k fe 2s □□ 2s 2s 2s fe ois 2s fe 2s 2k 2c 2s oie 2g is 2 2k 2s of oe fe 2k 2k 2 2 2k ie of 2 oe 2 of oe of 2 ie of 2 2K og 28 ok oi OK Ko oe OK Ko OK KO OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK KK * LINDA R. PERRIN, * CIV 16-4178 * Plaintiff, * * VS. + ORDER * NANCY A. BERRYHILL, * Acting Commissioner of Social Security, * * Defendant. * 2 2 2 fe 2 2k 2 ae oie 2k 2s 2 oie oe 2c 2 fe 2s fe 2s 2k fe 2 2s 2k 2 2 2s oie fs 2 2s 2k fe 2s 2k 2s 2g fe 2s 2s fe 2s ois fe 2s 2k 2k fe 2s 2k 2 ois 2k □□ 2s oie 2s 2k 2s 2s oi oie 2s 2 2 2 ok 2K 2 Ok This Court referred the case to the United States Magistrate for the purpose of issuing a Report and Recommendation. The Magistrate Judge has recommended that the Commissioner’s denial of benefits be reversed and remanded for reconsideration pursuant to
42 U.S.C. § 405(g), sentence four.
A sentence four remand is proper when the district court makes a substantive ruling regarding the correctness of the Commissioner’s decision and remands the case in accordance with such ruling. Buckner v. Apfel,
213 F.3d 1006, 1010(8th Cir. 2000). Remand with instructions to award benefits is appropriate “only if the record overwhelmingly supports such a finding.”
Buckner at 1011.
Even though no objections have been filed to the Report and Recommendation, the Court has carefully conducted a de novo review of the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation and the record of the administrative proceedings. After having reviewed the record including the briefing by the parties subsequent to the entry of the Decision of the Commissioner, the Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation. Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED: 1. That the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, Doc. 17, is ADOPTED by the Court.
2. That Plaintiff's Motion to Reverse Decision of the Commissioner, Doc. 13, is GRANTED. a. That the Commissioner’s decision is REVERSED and REMANDED to the Commissioner for reconsideration pursuant to
42 U.S.C. § 405(g), sentence four. Dated this 23rd day of January, 2018. BY THE COURT: fe Lawrence L. Piersol United States District Judge ATTEST: MATTHEW W. Dar Clerk
Deputy
Reference
- Status
- Unknown