Cases

OPINION AND ORDER HON. R. STEVEN WHALEN, U.S. Magistrate Judge Plaintiff Daniel Richard Shipman brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), challenging a final decision of Defendant Commissioner denying his application for Disability Insurance Benefits (“DIB”) under the Social Security Act. Both parties have filed summary judgment motions. For the reasons set for

OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR ■ SUMMARY JUDGMENT, AND REMANDING FOR FURTHER PRO- • CEEDINGS . BERNARD A. FRIEDMAN, SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE This. matter is presently before, the Court on cross motions for summary judgment [docket entries 9 and 16]. Pursuant to E.D. Mich. LR 7.1(f)(2), the Court shall decide these motions witho

ORDER MICHAEL R. BARRETT, District Judge. This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (“R & R”) filed by the Magistrate Judge on August 15,2011. (Doc.18.) Proper notice has been given to the parties under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), including notice that the parties would waive further appeal if they failed to file objections to the R & R

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Julian Harman appeals the district court’s order adopting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and entering judgment for the Commissioner in this action challenging the denial of disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income. We have reviewed th

ORDER THAT: (1) THE ALJ’S NON-DISABILITY FINDING IS NOT SUPPORTED BY SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE, AND IS REVERSED; (2) JUDGMENT IS ENTERED IN FAVOR OF PLAINTIFF AWARDING BENEFITS; AND (3) THIS CASE IS CLOSED TIMOTHY S. BLACK, District Judge. This is a Social Security disability benefits appeal. At issue is whether the administrative law judge (“ALJ”) erred in finding the Plaintiff “not disabled” and therefore not e

EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judge: Plaintiff-Appellant, Earnest Jones, appeals the district court’s decision affirming the Commissioner of Social Security’s determination that Jones is not entitled to social security disability insurance benefits or supplemental security income. We affirm. I Earnest Jones (“Jones”) injured his back while working as

POSNER, Circuit Judge. An applicant for social security disability benefits appeals from the district court’s affirmance of the denial of her application by an administrative law judge, whose decision became final when the Appeals Council of the Social Security Administration declined to review it. The appellant is a 57-year-old woman who was diagnosed in 2

OPINION OF THE COURT RENDELL, Circuit Judge. Lisa Mirabile appeals from the District Court’s order affirming a final administrative action of the Commissioner of Social Security (the “Commissioner”). The District Court affirmed the Commissioner’s decision that Mirabile was not disabled and thus not entitled to disability insurance benefits under Title II or Supplemental Security Income under Title XVI of th

OPINION OF THE COURT RENDELL, Circuit Judge. Lisa Mirabile appeals from the District Court’s order affirming a final administrative action of the Commissioner of Social Security (the “Commissioner”). The District Court affirmed the Commissioner’s decision that Mirabile was not disabled and thus not entitled to disability insurance benefits under Title II or Supplemental Security Income under Title XVI of th

580 F.Supp.2d 572 (2008) Christy PETHERS, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant. Case No. 1:07-cv-605. United States District Court, W.D. Michigan, Southern Division. October 1, 2008. *574 Themis J. Fotieo, Reamon Fotieo Szczytko & Fedewa, P.C., Grand Rapids, MI, for Plaintiff. Ronald M. Stella, U.S.

540 F.Supp.2d 433 (2008) Kevin MILLER, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant. No. 07-CV-6184L. United States District Court, W.D. New York. March 26, 2008. *434 Kevin Miller, Ontario, NY, pro se. Christopher V. Taffe, U.S. Attorney's Office, Rochester, NY, for Defendant. DECISION AND O

600 F.Supp.2d 740 (2009) William S. NICHOLSON, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Defendant. Civil Action No. 1:08CV17. United States District Court, N.D. West Virginia. February 27, 2009. *741 Joyce H. Morton, Montie Vannostrand, Vannostrand & Morton, PLLC, Webster Springs, WV, for Plaintiff. <

323 F.Supp.2d 1230 (2004) Lois HUGHES, Plaintiff, v. Jo Anne B. BARNHART, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant. No. CIV.A. 03-G-0781-W. United States District Court, N.D. Alabama, Western Division. June 29, 2004. *1231 A Patrick Ray, III, R D Pitts & Associates PC, Birmingham, AL, for Lois Hughes, plaintiff. Alic

624 F.Supp.2d 357 (2008) Nicholas CHONKO, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Defendant. Master File: No. 06-CV-1647 (WJM). United States District Court, D. New Jersey. April 22, 2008. *358 Agnes S. Wladyka, Agnes S. Wladyka, LLC, Jon C. Dubin, Rutgers School of Law-Newark, Urban Legal Clinic, Newark, NJ

303 F.Supp.2d 804 (2004) John L. HUGHES v. Jo Anne B. BARNHART, Commissioner of Social Security No. CIV.A. 03-174-A-1. United States District Court, M.D. Louisiana. February 6, 2004. *805 Russell Clayton Monroe, Greensburg, LA, for plaintiff. John Joseph Gaupp, United States Attorney's Office, Baton Rouge, LA, for defendan

475 F.Supp.2d 716 (2007) David D'ANGELO, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant. No. 1:05-CV-004. United States District Court, W.D. Michigan, Southern Division. January 22, 2007. *717 James R. Rinck, Grand Rapids, MI, for Plaintiff. Ronald M. Stella, U.S. Attorney, Grand Rapids, MI, for Defendant.

206 F.Supp.2d 771 (2002) Angela C. HUGHES, Plaintiff v. Jo Anne B. BARNHART, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant No. CIV.A. 102CV00008. United States District Court, W.D. Virginia, Abingdon Division. June 20, 2002. *772 Gerald Francis Sharp, LeBanon, VA, for Plaintiff. Sara Bugbee Winn, Thomas L. Eckert, U.S. Attorn

HUGHES, Circuit Judge. Judith Miskill challenges an Arbitrator’s award sustaining her removal by the Social Security Administration for violations of the Agency’s- time and attendance policy. Because the Arbitrator’s decision is not in accordance with law, we vacate and remand. I Ms. Miskill was employed as an Information Tec

992 F.Supp. 243 (1997) Alice Rae HUGHES, Plaintiff, v. Kenneth S. APFEL, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant. No. 96-CV-829H. United States District Court, W.D. New York. December 15, 1997. *244 Dennis A. Clary, Toohey & Dowd, P.C., Lewiston, NY, for Petitioner. Jane B. Wolfe, U.S. Atty., Buffalo, NY, for Respon

20 F.Supp.2d 1133 (1998) Douglas A. RUSSELL, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant. No. 1:96 CV 799. United States District Court, W.D. Michigan, Southern Division. September 28, 1998. Kenneth Frank Laritz, Kenneth F. Laritz Law Offices, Clinton Township, MI, for Douglas A. Russell. Michael L. Schipper, Asst. U.S. Attorney, Michael H. Dettm