From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Sarah M. v. Kijakazi

United States District Court, N.D. New York
Sep 29, 2021
Civil Action 3:20-CV-0271 (DEP) (N.D.N.Y. Sep. 29, 2021)

Opinion

Civil Action 3:20-CV-0271 (DEP)

09-29-2021

SARAH M., Plaintiff, v. KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, [1] Defendant.

FOR PLAINTIFF LACHMAN GORTON LAW FIRM PETER A. GORTON, ESQ. FOR DEFENDANT SOCIAL SECURITY ADMIN. DANIEL S. TARABELLI, ESQ.


FOR PLAINTIFF LACHMAN GORTON LAW FIRM PETER A. GORTON, ESQ.

FOR DEFENDANT SOCIAL SECURITY ADMIN. DANIEL S. TARABELLI, ESQ.

ORDER

DAVID E. PEEBLES, U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Currently pending before the court in this action, in which plaintiff seeks judicial review of an adverse administrative determination by the Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner”), pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 405(g) and 1383(c), are cross-motions for judgment on the pleadings.Oral argument was conducted in connection with those motions on September 28, 2021, during a telephone conference held on the record. At the close of argument, I issued a bench decision in which, after applying the requisite deferential review standard, I found that the Commissioner's determination did not result from the application of proper legal principles and is not supported by substantial evidence, providing further detail regarding my reasoning and addressing the specific issues raised by the plaintiff in this appeal.

This matter, which is before me on consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), has been treated in accordance with the procedures set forth in General Order No. 18. Under that General Order once issue has been joined, an action such as this is considered procedurally, as if cross-motions for judgment on the pleadings had been filed pursuant to Rule 12(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

After due deliberation, and based upon the court's oral bench decision, a transcript of which is attached and incorporated herein by reference, it is hereby

ORDERED, as follows:

1) Plaintiff's motion for judgment on the pleadings is GRANTED.

2) The Commissioner's determination that plaintiff was not disabled at the relevant times, and thus is not entitled to benefits under the Social Security Act, is VACATED.

3) The matter is hereby REMANDED to the Commissioner, without a directed finding of disability, for further proceedings consistent with this determination.

4) The clerk is respectfully directed to enter judgment, based upon this determination, remanding the matter to the Commissioner pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) and closing this case.

Matter Omitted


Summaries of

Sarah M. v. Kijakazi

United States District Court, N.D. New York
Sep 29, 2021
Civil Action 3:20-CV-0271 (DEP) (N.D.N.Y. Sep. 29, 2021)
Case details for

Sarah M. v. Kijakazi

Case Details

Full title:SARAH M., Plaintiff, v. KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Acting Commissioner of Social…

Court:United States District Court, N.D. New York

Date published: Sep 29, 2021

Citations

Civil Action 3:20-CV-0271 (DEP) (N.D.N.Y. Sep. 29, 2021)