From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hayes v. Berryhill

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Jul 26, 2018
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:17-CV-648 (M.D. Pa. Jul. 26, 2018)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:17-CV-648

07-26-2018

EVELYN LINA HAYES, Plaintiff v. NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Defendant


( ) ORDER

AND NOW, this 26th day of July, 2018, upon consideration of the report (Doc. 15) of Magistrate Judge Karoline Mehalchick, recommending the court vacate the decision of the administrative law judge denying the application of plaintiff Evelyn Lina Hayes ("Hayes") for a period of disability, disability insurance benefits, and supplemental security income, and remand this matter for further proceedings, wherein Judge Mehalchick opines that the administrative law judge's decision is not "supported by substantial evidence," 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), and it appearing that the Commissioner of Social Security ("Commissioner") does not object to the report, see FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(2), and the court noting that failure to timely object to a magistrate judge's conclusions "may result in forfeiture of de novo review at the district court level," Nara v. Frank, 488 F.3d 187, 194 (3d Cir. 2007) (citing Henderson v. Carlson, 812 F.2d 874, 878-79 (3d Cir. 1987)), but that, as a matter of good practice, a district court should "afford some level of review to dispositive legal issues raised by the report," Henderson, 812 F.2d at 878; see also Taylor v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., 83 F. Supp. 3d 625, 626 (M.D. Pa. 2015) (citing Univac Dental Co. v. Dentsply Int'l, Inc., 702 F. Supp. 2d 465, 469 (M.D. Pa. 2010)), in order to "satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record," FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b), advisory committee notes, and, following review of the record, the court being in agreement with Judge Mehalchick's recommendation, and concluding that there is no clear error on the face of the record, it is hereby ORDERED that:

1. The report (Doc. 15) of Magistrate Judge Mehalchick is ADOPTED.

2. The Clerk of Court shall enter judgment in favor of plaintiff Evelyn Lina Hayes and against the Commissioner of Social Security ("Commissioner") as set forth in the following paragraph.

3. The Commissioner's decision is VACATED and this matter is REMANDED to the Commissioner with instructions to conduct a new administrative hearing, develop the record fully, and evaluate the evidence appropriately in accordance with this order and the report (Doc. 15) of Magistrate Judge Mehalchick.

4. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case.

/S/ CHRISTOPHER C. CONNER

Christopher C. Conner, Chief Judge

United States District Court

Middle District of Pennsylvania


Summaries of

Hayes v. Berryhill

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Jul 26, 2018
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:17-CV-648 (M.D. Pa. Jul. 26, 2018)
Case details for

Hayes v. Berryhill

Case Details

Full title:EVELYN LINA HAYES, Plaintiff v. NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Defendant

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Date published: Jul 26, 2018

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:17-CV-648 (M.D. Pa. Jul. 26, 2018)

Citing Cases

McGee v. Kijakazi

The Court emphasizes that “[n]o principle of administrative law or common sense requires us to remand a case…

McAuliffe v. O'Malley

that the Court employs cautiously when reviewing the Commissioner's final decisions. Hayes v. Berryhill, No.…