WILSON
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.
Wilson sought judicial review of a Social Security Administration benefits denial. The district court granted the Commissioner's motion for remand under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), reversed the Commissioner's decision, and remanded the case for further administrative proceedings while entering judgment in the plaintiff's favor.
The court granted the Commissioner's motion to remand. The court reversed the Commissioner's decision and remanded the case for further proceedings before the Social Security Administration, while entering judgment in the plaintiff's favor pursuant to the proper procedure for sentence four remands.
[1] A court may remand a Social Security 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 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“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 court's statutory authority under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) to review and modify SSA decisions
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceWilson filed suit challenging the Commissioner of Social Security's decision regarding her benefits claim. The Commissioner moved to remand the case f…
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.
v. Case No. 8:23-cv-2440-CPT
COMMISSIONER OF THE
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,
Defendant. ______________________________________/
O R D E R
Before the Court is Defendant Commissioner’s 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 opposed by the Plaintiff. 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 27th day of March 2024. hii reteay PALS
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)