Allard v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration
Peter Dale Allard |
Commissioner of Social Security Administration |
Social Security Administrative Record |
8:2020cv02400 |
June 24, 2020 |
US District Court for the District of South Carolina |
Jacquelyn D Austin |
Timothy M Cain |
Social Security: DIWC/DIWW |
42 U.S.C. ยง 1383 |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on August 5, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 8 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Peter Dale Allard. Commissioner of Social Security Administration served on 7/8/2020, pursuant to Local Rule 83.VII.03 answer due 11/5/2020. (Attachments: #1 proof of service)(Mayes, W) |
Filing 6 ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge Jacquelyn D Austin. Signed by Honorable Timothy M Cain on 7/7/20. (alew, ) |
Filing 5 CONSENT to Jurisdiction by US Magistrate Judge by Peter Dale Allard.. (Mayes, W) |
Filing 4 TEXT ORDER. In accordance with the policy of the Judicial Conference of the United States, the Administrative Office of the United States Courts (AOUSC) recently completed a Survey of Magistrate Judge Positions in the District of South Carolina. The report is a district-wide review of the court's magistrate judge positions. By local rule, all social security appeals are automatically referred to magistrate judges on a district-wide rotation for reports and recommendations or final disposition by consent of the parties. According to the report, for the period of 2015-2019, social security appeals in this district increased by 37 percent, and felony criminal cases increased by over 16 percent. As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, grand jury proceedings were postponed, and criminal jury trials have been continued through August 1, 2020. Most detention facilities have initiated mitigation measures which limit the transportation of inmates and in-person visits, including attorney visits. These events have necessarily resulted in a backlog of criminal cases which will require attention as such restrictions are relaxed. New criminal cases will be generated once Grand Jury proceedings resume.Criminal cases take priority over civil cases due in part due to the Speedy Trial Act. Once restrictive measures are released, the court anticipates a flood of criminal matters that will require disposition, which must be given priority over civil matters, including social security appeals. This is in addition to a recent increase in filings by federal inmates seeking reduction in sentences, compassionate release, and other collateral relief pursuant to the First Step Act of 2019 and recent appellate court opinions.The Federal Magistrates Act of 1968 established the magistrate judge's system as a supplemental judicial resource to assist the district courts and provide better service to litigants.The AOUSC report notes that in 2019, of the 350 social security appeals decided in the District of South Carolina, only 27 (7.7 percent) were disposed of by magistrate judges with the parties' consent. According to the report:"Many districts around the country have had great success in encouraging consent to magistrate judges in social security appeal cases. Maximizing dispositions on consent rather than through reports and recommendations could be part of the court's strategy, to the extent it is feasible, for maintaining the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of these cases, as well as realizing the benefits of consent outlined below. Consent to disposition by the magistrate judge can bring about a quicker resolution of the appeal than the report and recommendation process." |
Filing 3 Summons Issued as to Commissioner of Social Security Administration. U.S. Attorney and U.S. Attorney General. (alew, ) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Commissioner of Social Security Administration ( Filing fee $ 400 receipt number 0420-9178160.) Clerk's Note: See 28:636(b)(1)(C)(4)(c)(1) and Local Rule 83.VII.02 regarding Consents to Proceed before Magistrate Judge in Social Security cases. Consent to Proceed before Magistrate Judge forms are available on the Court's website., filed by Peter Dale Allard. Service due by 9/22/2020(alew, ) |
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 South Carolina District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.