From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wuerth v. Astrue

United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Tampa Division
Mar 7, 2008
Case No: 8:06-CV-1353-T-30TBM (M.D. Fla. Mar. 7, 2008)

Summary

holding ALJ erred by failing to discuss a number of claimant's impairments in any meaningful manner

Summary of this case from Christian v. Soc. Sec. Admin.

Opinion

Case No: 8:06-CV-1353-T-30TBM.

March 7, 2008


ORDER


THIS CAUSE came on for consideration upon the Report and Recommendation submitted by Magistrate Judge Thomas B. McCoun, III (Dkt. #20). The Court notes that neither party filed written objections to the Report and Recommendation and the time for filing such objections has elapsed.

After careful consideration of the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge in conjunction with an independent examination of the file, the Court is of the opinion that the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation should be adopted, confirmed, and approved in all respects. ACCORDINGLY, it is therefore, ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:

1. The Report and Recommendation (Dkt. #20) of the Magistrate Judge is adopted, confirmed, and approved in all respects and is made a part of this order for all purposes, including appellate review.

2. The decision of the Defendant Commissioner is REVERSED and REMANDED.

3. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in favor of the Plaintiff.

4. The Clerk is directed to close this case.

5. The Court reserves jurisdiction to consider fees and costs.

DONE and ORDERED in Orlando, Florida.


Summaries of

Wuerth v. Astrue

United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Tampa Division
Mar 7, 2008
Case No: 8:06-CV-1353-T-30TBM (M.D. Fla. Mar. 7, 2008)

holding ALJ erred by failing to discuss a number of claimant's impairments in any meaningful manner

Summary of this case from Christian v. Soc. Sec. Admin.

finding ALJ did not meaningfully discuss alleged impairments where his review of the medical record included no discussion of the impairments, despite his acknowledging plaintiff's testimony of such and citing to records reflecting diagnoses, symptoms, and treatment

Summary of this case from Miner v. Astrue

finding that remand was warranted because it was not possible to ascertain whether the ALJ considered each of the claimant's impairments.

Summary of this case from Johnson v. Astrue
Case details for

Wuerth v. Astrue

Case Details

Full title:LISA A. WUERTH, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social…

Court:United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Tampa Division

Date published: Mar 7, 2008

Citations

Case No: 8:06-CV-1353-T-30TBM (M.D. Fla. Mar. 7, 2008)

Citing Cases

Miner v. Astrue

His failure to do so was error. See Gibson, 779 F.2d at 622-23 (finding error where ALJ did not discuss each…

Johnson v. Astrue

Next, Plaintiff contends that the Commissioner committed reversible error because he did not appropriately…