Barnhart v. Colvin

Barnhart v. Colvin

Plaintiff:	George Alan Barnhart
Defendant:	Carolyn W. Colvin
Case Number:	2:2016cv04059
Filed:	May 3, 2016
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia
Office:	Charleston Office
County:	Wood
Presiding Judge:	Dwane L. Tinsley
Presiding Judge:	John T. Copenhaver
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
August 23, 2017	Filing 14 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER adopting and incorporating the 13 Proposed Findings and Recommendation by Magistrate Judge; Plaintiff's 10 request for a remand is granted; Defendant's 11 request to affirm the decision of the Commissi oner is denied; the decision of the Commissioner is reversed; this action is remanded pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), for further proceedings which shall include a consultative examination of claimant, including IQ testing, an explanation of the factors listed in 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1527 and 416.927(d)(2)-(6) in determining the weight given to the opinions of Dr. Young, Mr. Atkinson, Dr. Allen and Ms. Dudley, and, if the ALJ does not adopt ALJ Taylor's fi nding that the claimant meets Listing 12.05C, a more detailed explanation of the reasons for the non-adoption, and as more fully set forth in the magistrate judge's Proposed Findings and Recommendation. Signed by Judge John T. Copenhaver, Jr. on 8/23/2017. (cc: counsel of record; United States Magistrate Judge) (taq)

Date Filed

Document Text

August 23, 2017

Filing 14 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER adopting and incorporating the 13 Proposed Findings and Recommendation by Magistrate Judge; Plaintiff's 10 request for a remand is granted; Defendant's 11 request to affirm the decision of the Commissi oner is denied; the decision of the Commissioner is reversed; this action is remanded pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), for further proceedings which shall include a consultative examination of claimant, including IQ testing, an explanation of the factors listed in 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1527 and 416.927(d)(2)-(6) in determining the weight given to the opinions of Dr. Young, Mr. Atkinson, Dr. Allen and Ms. Dudley, and, if the ALJ does not adopt ALJ Taylor's fi nding that the claimant meets Listing 12.05C, a more detailed explanation of the reasons for the non-adoption, and as more fully set forth in the magistrate judge's Proposed Findings and Recommendation. Signed by Judge John T. Copenhaver, Jr. on 8/23/2017. (cc: counsel of record; United States Magistrate Judge) (taq)

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 West Virginia Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Barnhart v. Colvin
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: George Alan Barnhart
Represented By:	Jan Dils
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: Carolyn W. Colvin
Represented By:	Eric P. Kressman
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?