Jeffrey C. v. Berryhill
- Eric Tostrud
- 0:17-cv-05366
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 1
In Jeffrey C. v. Berryhill, Judge Tostrud denied Jeffrey C.’s summary-judgment motion, granted Berryhill’s, and entered judgment.
Jeffrey C.’s motion was denied, while Nancy Berryhill’s motion was granted and judgment was entered for her.
What happened
Jeffrey C. v. Berryhill concerned competing motions for summary judgment in a case against the Acting Commissioner of Social Security. The court had received a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, and no party objected.
Because there were no objections, the court reviewed the recommendation for clear error. The opinion says the court found no clear error, but it does not describe the underlying Social Security issues or the recommendation’s reasoning.
Judge Eric C. Tostrud accepted the report and recommendation, denied Jeffrey C.’s motion for summary judgment, granted Nancy Berryhill’s motion for summary judgment, and ordered judgment entered accordingly.
The detailed version
- Jeffrey C. v. Berryhill · No. 0:17-cv-05366
- Eric Tostrud
- Jan. 17, 2019
Background The court considered a December 21, 2018 report and recommendation from United States Magistrate Judge Hildy Bowbeer. The opinion identifies Jeffrey C. as the plaintiff and Nancy Berryhill, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, as the defendant. The opinion does not describe the underlying Social Security dispute.
Review of the Recommendation No party objected to the report and recommendation. The court therefore reviewed it for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake apparent from the record. The court found no clear error and accepted the report and recommendation.
Rulings The court denied Jeffrey C.’s motion for summary judgment, granted Nancy Berryhill’s motion for summary judgment, and ordered judgment entered accordingly. The opinion does not state the specific reasoning underlying those summary-judgment rulings beyond its acceptance of the report and recommendation.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.