Lewis v. Social Security Administration et al
Plaintiff: Malinda Sue Lewis
Defendant: Social Security Administration and SSA-Email Notification
Case Number: 2:2010cv00124
Filed: December 17, 2010
Court: US District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee
Office: Cookeville Office
County: Overton
Presiding Judge: John S. Bryant
Presiding Judge: Thomas Wiseman
Nature of Suit: Retirement and Survivors Benefits
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 0405
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
March 5, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 24 ORDER: Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Bryant in which he recommends Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment on the Administrative Record be denied and the decision of the Commissioner be affirmed. The Plaintiff has filed objections insisting that the Administrative Law Judge erred in failing to consider whether Plaintiff's foot problems met or exceeded the listing in 102A. The Magistrate Judge has answered this objection in that all of the factors of a me dical listing must be met. One that was not met is that the Plaintiff is ambulatory with a cane. In order to meet 102A, the claimant must need to use both arms, that is a walker or two canes. The recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is correct in that the findings of the Administrative Law Judge are supported by substantial evidence, and there was no error. Plaintiff's objections are overruled and the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, Document # 22 , is AFFIRMED. Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment on the Administrative Record, Document #14, is DENIED, and this case is DISMISSED. Signed by Senior Judge Thomas Wiseman on 3/5/2012. (hb)
March 9, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 13 ORDER granting 12 Motion for Leave to substitute the previously filed administrative record. Signed by Magistrate Judge John S. Bryant on 3/9/11. (dt)
March 2, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 11 ORDER: Plaintiff is directed to file a motion for judgment on the administrative record supported by a brief within 30 days of entryof this order. The defendant shall, within 30 days of service of the plaintiff's brief, file a brief in response. The plaintiff has 20 days after service of the defendant's response to file a reply brief. Signed by Magistrate Judge John S. Bryant on 3/2/11. (dt)
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 Tennessee Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Lewis v. Social Security Administration et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Malinda Sue Lewis
Represented By: John W. Allen
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: Social Security Administration
Represented By: Sam Delk Kennedy, Jr.
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: SSA-Email Notification
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?