United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Western Division
PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
VOLPE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
following recommended disposition has been sent to United
States District Judge J. Leon Holmes. Any party may serve and
file written objections to this recommendation. Objections
should be specific and should include the factual or legal
basis for the objection. If the objection is to a factual
finding, specifically identify that finding and the evidence
that supports your objection. An original and one copy of
your objections must be received in the office of the United
States District Court Clerk no later than fourteen (14) days
from the date of the findings and recommendations. The copy
will be furnished to the opposing party. Failure to file
timely objections may result in a waiver of the right to
appeal questions of fact.
are objecting to the recommendation and also desire to submit
new, different, or additional evidence, and to have a new
hearing for this purpose before either the District Judge or
Magistrate Judge, you must, at the time you file your written
objections, include the following:
1. Why the record made before the Magistrate Judge is
2. Why the evidence to be proffered at the new hearing (if
such a hearing is granted) was not offered at the hearing
before the Magistrate Judge.
3. The details of any testimony desired to be introduced at
the new hearing in the form of an offer of proof, and a copy,
or the original, of any documentary or other non-testimonial
evidence desired to be introduced at the new hearing.
this submission, the District Judge will determine the
necessity for an additional evidentiary hearing. Mail your
objections and “Statement of Necessity” to:
Clerk, United States District Court Eastern District of
Arkansas 600 West Capitol Avenue, Suite A149 Little Rock, AR
Sherri Morehead, has appealed the final decision of the
Commissioner of the Social Security Administration to deny
her claim for disability insurance benefits. The parties
filed their respective briefs, and the case is ready for a
review function is extremely limited. The Court's
function on review is to determine whether the
Commissioner's decision is supported by substantial
evidence on the record as a whole and to analyze whether the
plaintiff was denied benefits due to legal error. Long v.
Chater, 108 F.3d 185, 187 (8th Cir. 1997); see
also, 42 U.S.C. §405(g). Substantial evidence is
such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as
adequate to support a conclusion. Richardson v.
Perales, 402 U.S. 389, 401 (1971); Reynolds v.
Chater, 82 F.3d 254, 257 (8th Cir. 1996).
assessing the substantiality of the evidence, the court must
consider evidence that detracts from the Commissioner's
decision as well as evidence that supports it; the court may
not, however, reverse the Commissioner's decision merely
because substantial evidence would have supported an opposite
decision. Woolf v. Shalala, 3 F.3d 1210, 1213 (8th
bears the burden of establishing a physical or mental
impairment that has lasted twelve months or more and has
prevented her from engaging in any substantial gainful
activity. 42 U.S.C. §§ 423 (d)(1)(A);
1382c(3)(A)(B). The only disputed issue in this case is
whether Plaintiff is disabled within the meaning of the
Social Security Act. Here, this issue ...