From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bickford v. Barnhart

United States District Court, D. Maine
Dec 31, 2002
242 F. Supp. 2d 39 (D. Me. 2002)

Summary

explaining that the failure by the ALJ to include a relevant limitation in the hypothetical question put to the vocational expert did not require reversal where omission was harmless

Summary of this case from Crespo v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.

Opinion

Civil No. 02-59-B-S

December 31, 2002

DAVID A. CHASE, ESQ., MacDONALD, CHASE SZEWCZYK, BANGOR, ME, for plaintiff RANDALL BICKFORD.

JAMES M. MOORE, ESQ., BANGOR, ME, ESKUNDER BOYD, ESQ., ASSISTANT REGIONAL COUNSEL, OFFICE OF THE CHIEF COUNSEL, REGION 1, BOSTON, MA, for defendant SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION COMMISSIONER.


ORDER ACCEPTING THE RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE


No objections having been filed to the Magistrate Judge's Recommended Decision filed November 20, 2002, the Recommended

Decision is accepted.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the commissioner's decision is VACATED and the cause REMANDED for further proceedings consistent with the Report and Recommended Decision of the Magistrate Judge.


Summaries of

Bickford v. Barnhart

United States District Court, D. Maine
Dec 31, 2002
242 F. Supp. 2d 39 (D. Me. 2002)

explaining that the failure by the ALJ to include a relevant limitation in the hypothetical question put to the vocational expert did not require reversal where omission was harmless

Summary of this case from Crespo v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.
Case details for

Bickford v. Barnhart

Case Details

Full title:RANDALL BICKFORD, Plaintiff v. JO ANNE B. BARNHART, Commissioner of Social…

Court:United States District Court, D. Maine

Date published: Dec 31, 2002

Citations

242 F. Supp. 2d 39 (D. Me. 2002)

Citing Cases

Ferguson v. Berryhill

As the plaintiff points out, see Statement of Errors at 4-5, 8-17, the administrative law judge never…

Morris v. Astrue

The ALJ considered that decision in the context of the entire record, and concluded that in context, that…