Woodard v. Social Security Administration, No. 3:2007cv01162 - Document 26 (M.D. Tenn. 2009)

Court Description: ORDER and FINAL JUDGMENT: For the reasons set forth in the accompanying Memorandum Opinion, the Court finds that the ALJ's decision is supported by substantial evidence in the record, and that the ALJ applied the correct legal principles in reac hing his decision. Accordingly, the Plaintiff's 21 Motion is DENIED and the decision of the Commissioner AFFIRMED. Judgment is hereby entered in favor of the Commissioner and this matter is DISMISSED. This is a final judgment for purposes of Fed. R. Civ. P. 58. Signed by Senior Judge Thomas Wiseman on 07/10/09. (ab)

Download PDF
Woodard v. Social Security Administration Doc. 26 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION THOMAS D. WOODARD, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 3:07-1162 Judge Thomas A. Wiseman, Jr. ORDER and FINAL JUDGMENT Before the Court is Plaintiff Thomas D. Woodard’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (Doc. No. 21) and supporting memorandum (Doc. No. 21) seeking judicial review of the Commissioner’s denial of his claim for Social Security Disability Insurance Benefits (“DIB”) and Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”). The Court hereby withdraws the reference of this case heretofore made to the Magistrate Judge. For the reasons set forth in the accompanying Memorandum Opinion, the Court finds that the ALJ’s decision is supported by substantial evidence in the record, and that the ALJ applied the correct legal principles in reaching his decision. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s Motion (Doc. No. 21) is DENIED and the decision of the Commissioner AFFIRMED. Judgment is hereby entered in favor of the Commissioner and this matter is DISMISSED. It is so ORDERED. This is a final judgment for purposes of Fed. R. Civ. P. 58. Thomas A. Wiseman, Jr. Senior U.S. District Judge Dockets.Justia.com

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.