2026 Begins with a Social Security Remand Breakdown
- juliana9396
- 3 days ago
- 2 min read
Every so often, a Social Security case reads less like routine administrative law and more like a cautionary tale about delay, broken process, and institutional fatigue. Hicks v. Commissioner, a decision issued by the Sixth Circuit, is one of those cases.
Background: The Hicks Case
Hicks was awarded Supplemental Security Income (SSI) in 2008.
Her case was later entangled in the Eric Conn / ALJ Daugherty fraud scandal, despite her having no involvement in the misconduct.
As a result, her benefits were vacated, and she was forced into years of redetermination proceedings.
Procedural History: A Long Road to Justice
Following a prior Sixth Circuit ruling that found due-process violations, Hicks received a second redetermination hearing in 2023.
Again, the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) denied benefits, stating that Hicks’s emphysema was “non-severe.”
The Commissioner Concedes Error
Q: What happened on appeal?
A: The Commissioner took the rare step of confessing error, agreeing that:
The ALJ’s denial was not supported by substantial evidence, and
Hicks was in fact disabled due to emphysema alone.
Sixth Circuit Orders Benefits
The Sixth Circuit agreed. The evidence made any other outcome unavoidable:
Medical records showed severe emphysema with symptoms like wheezing, coughing, and shortness of breath.
These facts contradicted the ALJ’s conclusions.
The court reiterated that "substantial evidence" must be something a reasonable mind could accept—which the ALJ’s decision did not meet.
No More Delays: Immediate Award Ordered
Rather than remanding the case again, the Sixth Circuit ordered an immediate award of benefits under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).
Citing Faucher, the panel held:
All factual issues had been resolved.
Further proceedings would “serve no meaningful purpose.”
Hicks Sought Broader Relief
Q: Did the court address broader implications for other victims of the Conn fraud scandal?
A: No. The court declined to address broader statutory or procedural issues—not because they lacked merit, but because doing so would constitute an advisory ruling. Courts remain disciplined in avoiding such rulings outside a class-action context.
Practice Takeaways for Social Security Advocates
Mischaracterization of medical evidence by an ALJ is a strong basis for reversal.
A well-supported confession of error can justify a direct award of benefits under sentence four.
Excessive procedural delay matters—courts will not demand one more remand “for formality’s sake.”
✅ After nearly two decades of unnecessary detours, the Sixth Circuit finally did what the record demanded: ordered benefits.
Got any questions? Schedule a consultation with us. I’m here to help. It’s a lot to take in, but we’ll get through it together. After all, navigating these waters is always easier when you’ve got someone to chat with.