Creel v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration

D. South Carolina

Creel v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration

DecidedApril 22, 2021

Docket5:20-cv-00276

StatusUnknown

This text of Creel v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration (Creel v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. South Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Creel v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, (D.S.C. 2021).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA ORANGEBURG DIVISION

Angela Creel, Case No. 5:20-cv-00276-TLW PLAINTIFF v. Order Andrew M. Saul, Commissioner of Social Security Administration, DEFENDANT

This social security matter now comes before the Court for review of the Report and Recommendation (Report) filed by the magistrate judge to whom this case was assigned. ECF No. 14. In the Report, the magistrate judge recommends reversing the Commissioner’s decision and remanding the case. The Commissioner filed a notice informing the Court that no objections would be filed. ECF No. 15. This matter is now ripe for decision. The Court is charged with conducting a review of any portion of the Report to which a specific objection is registered, and may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendations contained in the Report. 28 U.S.C. § 636. However, in the absence of objections, the Court is not required to give any explanation for adopting the recommendation. , 718 F.2d 198, 200 (4th Cir. 1983). In such a case, “a district court need not conduct a review, but instead must ‘only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.’” , 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005) (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory committee’s note). The Court has carefully reviewed the Report. Having found no clear error on

the face of the record, the Report is ACCEPTED and the Commissioner’s decision is REVERSED. This case is REMANDED to the Commissioner for further proceedings consistent with the Report and this order. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Terry L. Wooten Senior United States District Judge April 22, 2021 Columbia, South Carolina

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA ORANGEBURG DIVISION

Angela Creel, Case No. 5:20-cv-00276-TLW PLAINTIFF v. Order Andrew M. Saul, Commissioner of Social Security Administration, DEFENDANT

This social security matter now comes before the Court for review of the Report and Recommendation (Report) filed by the magistrate judge to whom this case was assigned. ECF No. 14. In the Report, the magistrate judge recommends reversing the Commissioner’s decision and remanding the case. The Commissioner filed a notice informing the Court that no objections would be filed. ECF No. 15. This matter is now ripe for decision. The Court is charged with conducting a review of any portion of the Report to which a specific objection is registered, and may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendations contained in the Report. 28 U.S.C. § 636. However, in the absence of objections, the Court is not required to give any explanation for adopting the recommendation. , 718 F.2d 198, 200 (4th Cir. 1983). In such a case, “a district court need not conduct a review, but instead must ‘only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.’” , 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005) (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory committee’s note). The Court has carefully reviewed the Report. Having found no clear error on

the face of the record, the Report is ACCEPTED and the Commissioner’s decision is REVERSED. This case is REMANDED to the Commissioner for further proceedings consistent with the Report and this order. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Terry L. Wooten Senior United States District Judge April 22, 2021 Columbia, South Carolina

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Creel v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/creel-v-commissioner-of-the-social-security-administration-scd-2021.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack