Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

McDonald v. Colvin

United States District Court, N.D. Ohio

January 11, 2017

LAURENCE JOSEPH MCDONALD, Plaintiff,
v.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security Defendant.

          OPINION & ORDER [RESOLVING DOC. 1-1]

          JAMES S. GWIN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         On November 15, 2012, Plaintiff Laurence Joseph McDonald applied for Disability Insurance Benefits and Supplemental Security Income under the Social Security Act.[1] After his application was denied, McDonald requested that an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) evaluate his application.[2]

         On March 16, 2015, the ALJ determined that Plaintiff McDonald was not disabled within the meanings of the Social Security Act.[3] The Appeals Council denied McDonald's request for review.[4]

         On January 29, 2016, Plaintiff McDonald filed this complaint for wrongful denial of disability benefits.[5] Consistent with Local Rule 72.2, the Court referred the matter to Magistrate Judge George J. Limbert. On December 20, 2016, Magistrate Judge Limbert issued a Report and Recommendation, finding the ALJ's determination was not supported by substantial evidence.[6]

         Specifically, the ALJ failed to set forth “good reasons” for discounting the opinions of McDonald's treating physicians.[7] Magistrate Limbert recommended that this Court vacate the Commissioner's denial of disability benefits and remand the case back to the ALJ for further proceedings.[8]

         The Federal Magistrates Act requires a district court to conduct a de novo review only of those portions of a Report and Recommendation to which the parties have made an objection.[9]On January 3, 2017, the Social Security Commissioner filed notice that the Social Security Commissioner would not object to Magistrate Judge Limbert's report and recommendation.[10]

         Absent objection, a district court may adopt the magistrate judge's report without review.[11] Moreover, having conducted its own review of the parties' briefs in this case, the Court agrees with the conclusions of Magistrate Judge Limbert.

         Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS in whole Magistrate Judge Limbert's findings of fact and conclusions of law and incorporates them fully herein by reference. The Court thus VACATES the Commissioner's denial of benefits and REMANDS this case to the Administrative Law Judge for further proceedings.

         IT IS SO ORDERED.

---------

Notes:

[1] Doc. 9 at 198-204.

[2] Id. at 156-57.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.