Desiree M. v. O'Malley
- Eric Tostrud
- 0:22-cv-02132
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
In Desiree M. v. O’Malley, Judge Tostrud granted Desiree M.’s summary-judgment motion, denied the Commissioner’s, reversed the decision, and remanded.
Desiree M. and the Commissioner of Social Security; the matter was returned to the Commissioner for further consideration of Dr. Amy Hilde-Philips’s medical opinion.
What happened
Desiree M. v. O’Malley involved Desiree M.’s challenge to the Commissioner of Social Security’s decision. The district court reviewed a magistrate judge’s recommendation because neither side objected.
The court found no clear error and accepted the recommendation. It granted Desiree M.’s motion for summary judgment, denied the Commissioner’s motion, and reversed the Commissioner’s decision.
The court, led by Judge Eric C. Tostrud, sent the matter back for consideration of Dr. Amy Hilde-Philips’s medical opinion under the applicable Social Security regulation.
The detailed version
- Desiree M. v. O'Malley · No. 0:22-cv-02132
- Eric Tostrud
- Jan. 10, 2024
Background
Magistrate Judge John F. Docherty issued a Report and Recommendation on December 18, 2023. No party objected. The district court therefore reviewed the recommendation for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake.
Rulings
The court found no clear error and accepted the Report and Recommendation. It granted Plaintiff Desiree M.’s motion for summary judgment and denied the Commissioner of Social Security’s motion for summary judgment.
The court reversed the Commissioner’s decision and remanded the matter under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). On remand, the Commissioner must consider Dr. Amy Hilde-Philips’s medical opinion under 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520c. The court ordered that judgment be entered accordingly.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.