Wert v. Commissioner of Social Security

Justia Dockets & Filings Sixth Circuit Ohio Southern District Wert v. Commissioner of Social Security

Wert v. Commissioner of Social Security

Plaintiff:	Amy Wert
Defendant:	Commissioner of Social Security
Case Number:	3:2015cv00083
Filed:	February 27, 2015
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio
Office:	Dayton Office
County:	MONTGOMERY
Presiding Judge:	Michael J Newman
Presiding Judge:	Walter H Rice
Nature of Suit:	Supplemental Security Income
Cause of Action:	42 U.S.C. § 405
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
February 26, 2016	Filing 12 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 11 Report and Recommendations, - Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that: 1. The Report and Recommendation filed on February 8, 2016 (Doc. # 11 ) is ADOPTED in full; 2. The Commissioner's non -disability determination is REVERSED; 3. This matter is REMANDED to the Commissioner under the FourthSentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further proceedings; and 4. This case is terminated on the docket of this Court. Signed by Judge Walter H. Rice on 2/26/2016. (srb)
February 8, 2016	Filing 11 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS THAT: (1) THE ALJS NON-DISABILITY FINDING BE FOUND UNSUPPORTED BY SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE, AND REVERSED; (2) THIS CASE BE REMANDED TO THE COMMISSIONER UNDER THE FOURTH SENTENCE OF 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) FOR PROCEEDINGS CONSISTENT WITH THIS OPINION; AND (3) THIS CASE BE CLOSED re 2 Complaint filed by Amy Wert. Objections to R&R due by 2/25/2016. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Newman on 2/8/16. (pb)

Date Filed

Document Text

February 26, 2016

Filing 12 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 11 Report and Recommendations, - Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that: 1. The Report and Recommendation filed on February 8, 2016 (Doc. # 11 ) is ADOPTED in full; 2. The Commissioner's non -disability determination is REVERSED; 3. This matter is REMANDED to the Commissioner under the FourthSentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further proceedings; and 4. This case is terminated on the docket of this Court. Signed by Judge Walter H. Rice on 2/26/2016. (srb)

February 8, 2016

Filing 11 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS THAT: (1) THE ALJS NON-DISABILITY FINDING BE FOUND UNSUPPORTED BY SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE, AND REVERSED; (2) THIS CASE BE REMANDED TO THE COMMISSIONER UNDER THE FOURTH SENTENCE OF 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) FOR PROCEEDINGS CONSISTENT WITH THIS OPINION; AND (3) THIS CASE BE CLOSED re 2 Complaint filed by Amy Wert. Objections to R&R due by 2/25/2016. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Newman on 2/8/16. (pb)

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Ohio Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Wert v. Commissioner of Social Security
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Amy Wert
Represented By:	Gary Marc Blumenthal
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: Commissioner of Social Security
Represented By:	John J. Stark
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?