From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Crisp v. Astrue

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE AT CHATTANOOGA
May 14, 2012
1:11-CV-205 (E.D. Tenn. May. 14, 2012)

Opinion

1:11-CV-205

05-14-2012

CURTIS R. CRISP Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL S. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendants.


Collier/Carter


JUDGMENT ORDER

Plaintiff Curtis R. Crisp ("Plaintiff") filed suit against Michael S. Astrue, Social Security Commissioner ("Defendant"), seeking judicial review of Defendant's decision denying her supplemental security income benefits. On April 23, 2012, United States Magistrate Judge William B. Mitchell Carter filed a report and recommendation ("R&R") in this case, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) (Court File No. 18). In the R&R, Judge Carter recommended: 1) Plaintiff's motion for judgment on the pleadings (Court File No. 13) seeking reversal be denied in part and granted to the extent it seeks remand under Sentence Four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g); 2) Defendant's motion for summary judgment (Court File No. 15) be denied; and 3) Defendant's decision denying benefits be reversed and remanded under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) in order for the Administrative Law Judge a) to make a more complete review of the entire administrative record by seeking a legible copy of the medical record from Dr. Solomon; and b) obtain the opinion of a state agency psychologist after a review of Plaintiff's entire medical record, including the reports of Dr. Zeigler and Dr. Solomon. Neither party has objected to the R&R within the given 14 days.

After reviewing the record, this Court agrees with the R&R. The Court hereby ACCEPTS and ADOPTS the magistrate judge's findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff's motion for judgment on the pleadings (Court File No. 13) to the extent it seeks remand under Sentence Four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), and DENIES Defendant's motion for summary judgment (Court File No. 15). The Court REVERSES Defendant's decision denying Plaintiff benefits pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), and REMANDS the case to Defendant for review consistent with Judge Carter's R&R (Court File No. 18).

SO ORDERED.

ENTER:

_________________________

CURTIS L. COLLIER

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Crisp v. Astrue

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE AT CHATTANOOGA
May 14, 2012
1:11-CV-205 (E.D. Tenn. May. 14, 2012)
Case details for

Crisp v. Astrue

Case Details

Full title:CURTIS R. CRISP Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL S. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE AT CHATTANOOGA

Date published: May 14, 2012

Citations

1:11-CV-205 (E.D. Tenn. May. 14, 2012)