ROWE
v.
COMMISSIONER OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
A district court granted the unopposed motion of the Social Security Administration Commissioner to remand a benefits case for further administrative proceedings, reversing the Commissioner's decision and entering judgment in favor of the claimant pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).
The court granted the Commissioner's motion to remand, reversed the Commissioner's decision, and remanded the case for further proceedings before the Social Security Administration. The court entered a final judgment in the claimant's favor as required by sentence four of § 405(g).
[1] A court may remand a Social Security Administration case for further administrative proceedings pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. …
[2] In a sentence four remand under 42 U.S.C. …
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“In a sentence four remand, the appropriate procedure is for a court to enter a final judgment in the claimant's favor.”
Establishes the required procedure for remanding Social Security cases under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g)
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePlaintiff Rowe brought an action challenging the Commissioner's decision regarding Social Security benefits. The Commissioner moved for remand to allo…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Sentence Four Remand cases and more on FLexlaw
Before the Court is Defendant Commissioner’s unopposed motion to remand this action pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). (Doc. 16). According to the Commissioner, such a remand is necessary “for further administrative proceedings” and is not contested by the Plaintiff. Id. The Commissioner also represents that, on remand, the Appeals Council will instruct the administrative law judge to “(1) reassess the opinion evidence; (2) take any further action needed to complete the administrative record; and (3) issue a new decision.” Id. Sentence four of section 405(g) provides that a “court shall have [the] power to enter, upon the pleadings and transcript of the record, a judgment affirming, modifying, or reversing the decision of the Commissioner . . . with or without remanding the cause for a rehearing.” 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). In a sentence four remand, the appropriate procedure is for a court to enter a final judgment in the claimant’s favor. Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292, 296-97 (1993); Jackson v. Chater, 99 F. 3d 1086, 1095 (11th Cir. 1996). In light of the above, it is hereby ORDERED: 1. The Commissioner’s motion (Doc. 16) is granted. 2. The Commissioner’s decision is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings before the Social Security Administration consistent with this Order. 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter Judgment in the Plaintiffs favor, to terminate any pending motions, and to close the case. SO ORDERED in Tampa, Florida, this 1st day of October 2024.
Nie adios Ack
HONORABLE CHRISTOPHER P. TUITE
United States Magistrate Judge Copies to: Counsel of record
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292 (U.S. 1993)
- Jackson v. Chater, 99 F.3d 1086 (11th Cir. 1996)