FULKS
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.
Amanda F. Fulks appealed a Social Security disability denial. The district court granted the Commissioner's unopposed motion for remand under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), sentence four, to allow the Administrative Law Judge to obtain supplemental vocational expert evidence and issue a new decision.
The court granted the Commissioner's motion and reversed and remanded the case under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) to allow the Commissioner to obtain supplemental vocational expert evidence, offer the plaintiff an opportunity for a hearing, and issue a new decision.
[1] A court may reverse a Commissioner's Social Security decision with or without remanding the cause for a rehearing.
[2] A sentence-four remand is appropriate when a court cannot discern the basis for the Commissioner's decision, allowing the Commissioner to explain the decision's basis.
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 intelligenceAmanda F. Fulks filed a Social Security disability claim that was denied by the Commissioner. The record was insufficient for the court to discern the…
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 Social Security Act Review cases and more on FLexlaw
Before the Court is the Commissioner's unopposed motion for entry of judgment pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), asking the Court to remand this case so the Commissioner can take further administrative action. (Doc. 16).
Under Title 42, United States Code, Section 405(g) the Court is empowered to reverse the decision of the Commissioner with or without remanding the cause for a rehearing. Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292 (1993). Where the court cannot discern the basis for the Commissioner's decision, a sentence-four remand may be appropriate to allow him to explain the basis for his decision. Falcon v. Heckler, 732 F. 2d 827, 829–30 (11th Cir. 1984) (holding remand was appropriate to allow the ALJ to explain the basis for the determination that the claimant's depression did not significantly affect her ability to work). On remand under sentence four, the ALJ should review the case on a complete record, including any new material evidence. Diorio v. Heckler, 721 F. 2d 726, 729 (11th Cir. 1983) (finding that it was necessary for the ALJ on remand to consider psychiatric report tendered to Appeals Council);
Reeves v. Heckler, 734 F. 2d 519, 522 n.1 (11th Cir. 1984) (holding that the ALJ should consider on remand the need for an orthopedic evaluation).
Upon review of the record and filings, I agree with the parties that it is appropriate to remand this matter to the Commissioner. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that:
(1) The Commissioner's motion is GRANTED and this action is REVERSED and REMANDED pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g)¹ to the Commissioner for the following reasons: “supplemental evidence from a vocational expert will be obtained; Plaintiff will be offered an opportunity for a hearing, and a new decision will be issued." (Doc. 16).
(2) The Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly and close the file.
DONE and ORDERED in Ocala, Florida on February 22, 2024.
PHILIP R. LAMMENS
United States Magistrate Judge
Copies furnished to: Counsel of Record Unrepresented Parties
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292 (U.S. 1993)
- Dirven D. Reeves v. Heckler, 734 F.2d 519 (11th Cir. 1984)
- Diorio v. Heckler, 721 F.2d 726 (11th Cir. 1983)
- Falcon v. Heckler, 732 F.2d 827 (11th Cir. 1984)