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.

Tipton v. Commissioner of Social Security

United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Western Division

January 24, 2018

JESSICA L. TIPTON, Plaintiff,
v.
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.

          District Judge Thomas M. Rose

         REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION[1] THAT: (1) THE NON-DISABILITYFINDING AT ISSUE BE FOUND UNSUPPORTED BY SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE, AND REVERSED; (2) THIS MATTER BE REMANDED TO THE COMMISSIONER UNDER THE FOURTH SENTENCE OF 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) FOR PROCEEDINGS CONSISTENT WITH THIS OPINION; AND (3) THIS CASE BE CLOSED

          Magistrate Judge Michael J. Newman

         This is a Social Security disability benefits appeal. At issue is whether the Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) erred in finding Plaintiff not “disabled” and therefore unentitled to Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”) and/or Disability Insurance Benefits (“DIB”).[2] This case is before the Court upon Plaintiffs Statement of Errors (doc. 6), the Commissioner's memorandum in opposition (doc. 7), the administrative record (doc. 5), and the record as a whole.[3]

         I.

         A. Procedural History

         Plaintiff filed applications for SSI and DIB asserting disability as of June 2, 2013. PageID 214-26. Plaintiff claims disability as a result of a number of impairments including, inter alia, seizures and a mild neurological cognitive disorder. PageID 37.

         After initial denials of her applications, Plaintiff received a hearing before ALJ Benjamin Chaykin on October 8, 2015. PageID 54-95. The ALJ issued a decision on November 19, 2015 finding Plaintiff not disabled. PageID 35-46. Specifically, the ALJ found at Step Five that, as a result of Plaintiff's residual functional capacity (“RFC”) to perform a full range of work at all exertional levels subject to nonexertional limitations, “there are jobs that exist in significant numbers in the national economy that [Plaintiff] can perform[.]” PageID 41-45.

         Thereafter, the Appeals Council denied Plaintiff's request for review, making the ALJ's non-disability finding the final administrative decision of the Commissioner. PageID 24-26. See Casey v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 987 F.2d 1230, 1233 (6th Cir. 1993). Plaintiff then filed this timely appeal. Cook v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., 480 F.3d 432, 435 (6th Cir. 2007).

         B. Evidence of Record

         The evidence of record is adequately summarized in the ALJ's decision (PageID 35-46), Plaintiff's Statement of Errors (doc. 6) and the Commissioner's memorandum in opposition (doc. 7). The undersigned incorporates all of the foregoing and sets forth the facts relevant to this appeal herein.

         II.

         A. Standard of Review

         The Court's inquiry on a Social Security appeal is to determine (1) whether the ALJ's non-disability finding is supported by substantial evidence, and (2) whether the ALJ employed the correct legal criteria. 42 U.S.C. § 405(g); Bowen v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.,478 F.3d 742, 745-46 (6th Cir. 2007). In performing this review, the ...


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.