Smith v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration

D. South Carolina

Smith v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration

DecidedSeptember 22, 2021

Docket1:21-cv-00328

StatusUnknown

This text of Smith v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration (Smith v. Commissioner of 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

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

Pincite

Opinion

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

Kimberly S.,1 ) C/A No.: 1:21-cv-328-SVH ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) ORDER Kilolo Kijakazi,2 Acting ) Commissioner of Social Security ) Administration, ) ) Defendant. ) )

Defendant, Kilolo Kijakazi, Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration (“Commissioner”), by her attorneys, M. Rhett DeHart, Acting United States Attorney for the District of South Carolina, and Marshall Prince, Assistant United States Attorney for said district, has moved this court, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), to enter a judgment with an order of reversal with remand of the cause to the Commissioner for further administrative proceedings. [ECF No. 19]. The motion represents that Plaintiff’s counsel consents to the motion.

1 The Committee on Court Administration and Case Management of the Judicial Conference of the United States has recommended that, due to significant privacy concerns in social security cases, federal courts should refer to claimants only by their first names and last initials. 2 Kilolo Kijakazi became the Acting Commissioner of Social Security on July 9, 2021. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 25(d), she is substituted for former Pursuant to the power of this court to enter a judgment affirming, modifying, or reversing the Commissioner’s decision with remand in Social Security actions under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), and given the Commissioner’s request for remand, this court hereby reverses the Commissioner’s decision under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) with a remand of the cause to the Commissioner for further administrative proceedings. See Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292 (1993). Upon remand, the Appeals Council shall vacate the Administrative Law Judge’s (“ALJ’s”) decision and refer the case to an ALJ to complete the record, further evaluate the evidence, provide Plaintiff an opportunity for another hearing, and issue

a new decision. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter a separate judgment pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 58. IT IS SO ORDERED. PP U feeder” September 22, 2021 Shiva V. Hodges Columbia, South Carolina United States Magistrate Judge

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

Kimberly S.,1 ) C/A No.: 1:21-cv-328-SVH ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) ORDER Kilolo Kijakazi,2 Acting ) Commissioner of Social Security ) Administration, ) ) Defendant. ) )

Defendant, Kilolo Kijakazi, Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration (“Commissioner”), by her attorneys, M. Rhett DeHart, Acting United States Attorney for the District of South Carolina, and Marshall Prince, Assistant United States Attorney for said district, has moved this court, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), to enter a judgment with an order of reversal with remand of the cause to the Commissioner for further administrative proceedings. [ECF No. 19]. The motion represents that Plaintiff’s counsel consents to the motion.

1 The Committee on Court Administration and Case Management of the Judicial Conference of the United States has recommended that, due to significant privacy concerns in social security cases, federal courts should refer to claimants only by their first names and last initials. 2 Kilolo Kijakazi became the Acting Commissioner of Social Security on July 9, 2021. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 25(d), she is substituted for former Pursuant to the power of this court to enter a judgment affirming, modifying, or reversing the Commissioner’s decision with remand in Social Security actions under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), and given the Commissioner’s request for remand, this court hereby reverses the Commissioner’s decision under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) with a remand of the cause to the Commissioner for further administrative proceedings. See Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292 (1993). Upon remand, the Appeals Council shall vacate the Administrative Law Judge’s (“ALJ’s”) decision and refer the case to an ALJ to complete the record, further evaluate the evidence, provide Plaintiff an opportunity for another hearing, and issue

a new decision. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter a separate judgment pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 58. IT IS SO ORDERED. PP U feeder” September 22, 2021 Shiva V. Hodges Columbia, South Carolina United States Magistrate Judge

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

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

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack