KOLODY v. ASTRUE

KOLODY v. ASTRUE

Plaintiff:	MARK J KOLODY
Defendant:	MICHAEL J. ASTRUE
Case Number:	1:2009cv00829
Filed:	October 27, 2009
Court:	US District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina
Office:	NCMD Office
County:	Cabarrus
Presiding Judge:	JAMES A. BEATY
Presiding Judge:
Nature of Suit:	None
Cause of Action:	42 U.S.C. § 205 Denial Social Security Benefits
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 10, 2014	Filing 24 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE signed by MAG/JUDGE L. PATRICK AULD on 2/10/2014, that Defendant's decision finding no disability be vacated and that the matter be remanded under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), for further administrative proceedings: 1) to consider whether Plaintiff's financial constraints explained his failure to follow recommended treatment and testing for Parkinson's disease (thereby altering the assessment of t he credibility of his symptom reporting, the formulation of his RFC, and the step five determination); 2) to reevaluate (also in connection with Plaintiff's RFC and the related ruling at step five) the opinions of Drs. Ferguson and Braunstein re garding matters short of the ultimate issue of disability, as well as to identify the weight given to such opinions and the rationale for that weighting; and 3) to address Listing 11.06. As a result, Defendant's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadi ngs (Docket Entry 19 ) should be denied and Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (Docket Entry 17 ) should be granted in part and denied in part, in that the Court should remand the case, but should not order an award of benefits. (Lloyd, Donna)

Date Filed

Document Text

February 10, 2014

Filing 24 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE signed by MAG/JUDGE L. PATRICK AULD on 2/10/2014, that Defendant's decision finding no disability be vacated and that the matter be remanded under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), for further administrative proceedings: 1) to consider whether Plaintiff's financial constraints explained his failure to follow recommended treatment and testing for Parkinson's disease (thereby altering the assessment of t he credibility of his symptom reporting, the formulation of his RFC, and the step five determination); 2) to reevaluate (also in connection with Plaintiff's RFC and the related ruling at step five) the opinions of Drs. Ferguson and Braunstein re garding matters short of the ultimate issue of disability, as well as to identify the weight given to such opinions and the rationale for that weighting; and 3) to address Listing 11.06. As a result, Defendant's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadi ngs (Docket Entry 19 ) should be denied and Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (Docket Entry 17 ) should be granted in part and denied in part, in that the Court should remand the case, but should not order an award of benefits. (Lloyd, Donna)

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 North Carolina Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: KOLODY v. ASTRUE
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: MARK J KOLODY
Represented By:	WALTER B. PATTERSON, II
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: MICHAEL J. ASTRUE
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?