Mark W. W. v. Colvin
- Eric Tostrud
- 0:23-cv-03263
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 1
In Mark W. W. v. Colvin, Judge Tostrud accepted the recommendation, denied Mark W. W.’s request, and granted the Commissioner’s request for judgment.
Mark W. W. and Carolyn W. Colvin; the court’s ruling favored Colvin’s request for judgment on the administrative record.
What happened
Mark W. W. v. Colvin concerns competing requests for judgment based on the administrative record. The opinion does not describe the underlying Social Security dispute.
No party objected to the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. The court reviewed it for clear error and found none.
Judge Eric C. Tostrud accepted the report and recommendation, denied Mark W. W.’s brief seeking judgment on the administrative record, granted Carolyn W. Colvin’s brief seeking that judgment, and ordered judgment entered accordingly.
The detailed version
- Mark W. W. v. Colvin · No. 0:23-cv-03263
- Eric Tostrud
- Dec. 18, 2024
Background
Magistrate Judge Douglas L. Micko issued a report and recommendation on December 2, 2024. Mark W. W. filed a brief seeking judgment on the administrative record, and Carolyn W. Colvin filed a brief seeking the same relief. The opinion does not state the underlying facts or explain the legal reasoning in the report and recommendation.
Review
No party objected to the report and recommendation. Because there were no objections, the court reviewed it for clear error, meaning it looked for an obvious mistake in the magistrate judge’s analysis. The court found no clear error.
Ruling
Judge Eric C. Tostrud accepted the report and recommendation. The court denied Mark W. W.’s brief seeking judgment on the administrative record, granted Carolyn W. Colvin’s brief seeking judgment on the administrative record, and ordered judgment entered accordingly.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.