Bostwick v. Social Security Administration Commissioner, No. 2:2016cv02125 - Document 14 (W.D. Ark. 2017)
Court Description: FINAL JUDGMENT AFFIRMING THE DECISION OF THE COMMISSIONER and Plaintiff's case is dismissed with prejudice. Signed by Honorable Mark E. Ford on June 12, 2017. (hnc)
Bostwick v. Social Security Administration Commissioner Doc. 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS FORT SMITH DIVISION REBA J. BOSTWICK v. PLAINTIFF CIVIL NO. 2:16-cv-2125-MEF NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting Commissioner, Social Security Administration1 DEFENDANT FINAL JUDGMENT This cause is before the Court on the Plaintiff’s complaint for judicial review of an unfavorable final decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration regarding her application for Supplemental Security Income. The parties have consented to entry of final judgment by the United States Magistrate Judge under the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), with any appeal to the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. The Court, having reviewed the record, the administrative transcript, the briefs of the parties, the applicable law, and oral argument having been waived, finds as follows, to-wit: For the reasons announced by the Court on the record on June 9, 2017, the Court finds that the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security is supported by substantial evidence, and the same is hereby affirmed. IT IS SO ORDERED this the 12th day of June, 2017. /s/ Mark E. Ford HON. MARK E. FORD UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Nancy A. Berryhill is now the Acting Commissioner of Social Security. Pursuant to Rule 25(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Nancy A. Berryhill should be substituted for Acting Commissioner Carolyn W. Colvin as the defendant in this suit. No further action needs to be taken to continue this suit by reason of the last sentence of section 205(g) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). 1 Dockets.Justia.com
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Terms of Service