Opinion ID: 656200
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: conclusion

Text: 22 The district court's orders were correct when entered but intervening law effected changes which require us to remand the case for the purpose of entry of a final judgment in compliance with Rule 58, as explained in Schaefer. As stated earlier, the definition of a final judgment elucidated by Finkelstein, Melkonyan, and Schaefer is based upon a Congressional statute which requires that a certain type of Social Security order be considered a final judgment. In this case, the district court's order of December 4, 1990 was an appealable order but because of non-compliance with Rules 58 and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, there was no formal judgment. The holdings in this opinion are confined to Social Security cases. 23 The case is REMANDED to the district court for the entry of a formal judgment in favor of the claimant.