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.

Velma Green v. Carolyn W. Colvin

March 25, 2013

VELMA GREEN, PLAINTIFF,
v.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN,*FN1 ACTING COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, DEFENDANT.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Allison Claire United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER

Plaintiff seeks judicial review of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security ("Commissioner") denying her applications for a period of disability and Disability Insurance Benefits ("DIB") and for supplemental security income ("SSI") under Titles II and XVI of the Social Security Act ("the Act"). The parties' cross motions for summary judgment are before the court. For the reasons discussed below, the court grants plaintiff's motion and remands the matter for further proceeding. ////

I. BACKGROUND

Plaintiff applied for a period of disability, DIB, and SSI on June 24, 2008,

alleging disability beginning June 14, 2004. Administrative Record ("AR") 128-41. Plaintiff's applications were initially denied on November 7, 2008, and upon reconsideration on January 15, 2009. AR 79-85. On January 13, 2010, a hearing was held before administrative law judge ("ALJ") Timothy Snelling. AR35. Plaintiff was represented by counsel at the hearing, at which she testified. AR 35-71.

In a decision dated March 19, 2010, the ALJ determined that plaintiff was not disabled under sections 216(i), 223(d) and 1614(a)(3)(A) of the Act.*fn2 AR 10-20. The ALJ made the following findings (citations to 20 C.F.R. omitted):

1. The claimant meets the insured status requirements of the Social Security Act through December 30, 2009.

2. The claimant has not engaged in substantial gainful activity since June 14, 2004, the alleged onset date.

3. The claimant has had the following severe impairments: chronic low back, hips, legs, arms, neck and shoulder pain. ...

4. The claimant does not have an impairment or combination of impairments that meets or medically equals one of the listed impairments in 20 CFR Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1. ...

5. After careful consideration of the entire record, I find that the claimant has the residual functional capacity to perform light work as defined in 20 CFR 404.1567(b) and 416.967(b) except that she can lift and carry 25 pounds both frequently and occasionally, stand and walk 6 hours in an 8-hour workday with normal breaks, sit six hours in an 8-hour workday with normal breaks and bend occasionally. ...

6. The claimant is unable to perform any past relevant work. ...

7. The claimant was born [in] 1955 and was 48 years old, which is defined as a younger individual age 18-49, on the alleged disability onset date. The claimant subsequently changed age category to closely approaching advanced age.

8. The claimant has at least a high school education and is able to communicate in English.

9. Transferability of job skills is not material to the determination of disability because using the Medical-Vocational Rules as a framework supports a finding that the claimant is "not disabled," whether or not the claimant has transferable job skills.

10. Considering the claimant's age, education, work experience, and residual functional capacity, there are jobs that exist in significant numbers in the national economy that the claimant can perform. ...

11. The claimant has not been under a disability, as defined in the Social Security Act, from June 14, 2004, ...


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.