Martin v. Berryhill, No. 4:2019cv00076 - Document 15 (N.D. Miss. 2020)

Court Description: FINAL JUDGMENT in favor of Martena Martin against Nancy Berryhill. The case is REMANDED for further proceedings. CASE CLOSED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jane M. Virden on 2/18/20. (ncb)

Download PDF
Martin v. Berryhill Doc. 15 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI GREENVILLE DIVISION MARTENA MARTIN PLAINTIFF NO. 4:19CV00076-JMV NANCY BERRYHILL, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY DEFENDANT FINAL JUDGMENT This cause is before the court on Plaintiff’s complaint for judicial review of an unfavorable final decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration denying a claim for supplemental security income benefits. 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 Fifth Circuit. The court, having reviewed the administrative record, the briefs of the parties, and the applicable law, and having heard oral argument, finds as follows: Consistent with the court’s oral ruling during a hearing held today, the court finds the ALJ’s residual functional capacity (“RFC”) determination is not supported by substantial evidence in the record. On remand, the ALJ must order a physical consultative examination of the claimant. The ALJ will provide the consultative examiner with copies of the claimant’s medical records and request, from the examiner, a function-by-function assessment of physical RFC. Ultimately, the ALJ will make a new RFC determination that is supported by substantial evidence in the record. Further, the ALJ must provide an explanation, supported by Dockets.Justia.com substantial evidence in the record, for rejecting any medical source opinion. And, to the extent necessary, the ALJ must obtain supplemental vocational expert evidence on the issue of whether there is any work the claimant can perform, considering her limitations. IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that this case is REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings. This, the 18th day of February, 2020. /s/ Jane M. Virden U. S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE 2

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 Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.