HURT
v.
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY
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.
In this Social Security benefits case, the District Court granted the Commissioner's unopposed motion to remand under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). The court reversed the Commissioner's decision and remanded for a new administrative hearing where the ALJ will provide supplemental hearing opportunity and updated vocational expert testimony.
The court granted the Commissioner's motion to remand. Under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), the appropriate procedure in such a remand is to enter a final judgment in the claimant's favor and remand the cause for rehearing consistent with the court's order.
[1] A court may remand a Social Security benefits case for a rehearing under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. …
[2] In a sentence four remand of a Social Security benefits case, the court should enter a final judgment in the claimant's favor.
Previewing 2 of 3 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“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."”
Establishes the statutory authority for the court's remand power 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 Hurt filed for Social Security benefits. The Commissioner's initial decision was challenged in district court. The Commissioner subsequently…
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 Action For Judicial Review Of Social Security Administration Decision 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. 15).
The Commissioner represents that, on remand, an administrative law judge (1) “will offer the [Plaintiff] an opportunity for a supplemental hearing;” (2) “will obtain updated vocational expert testimony on the [question] of whether there are a substantial number of jobs in the national economy that [the] Plaintiff can perform,” if such testimony is warranted; and (3) will issue a new decision. Id. The Commissioner also represents that the Plaintiff does not object to this relief. 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. 15) 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 Plaintiff's favor, to terminate any pending motions, and to close the case. SO ORDERED in Tampa, Florida, this 16th day of July 2024. bear "e 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)