Lachenal v. O'Malley
- Nelson Roman
- 7:24-cv-03839
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Lachenal v. O’Malley, Judge Roman reversed and remanded the Social Security case, while denying the plaintiff’s pleading-judgment motion without prejudice as moot.
William Gardner Lachenal and the Commissioner of Social Security; the case returns to the Social Security Administration for further proceedings, a new hearing, and a new decision.
What happened
William Gardner Lachenal sued Martin O’Malley, the Commissioner of Social Security. The judgment says the court acted for reasons stated in a September 12, 2024 stipulation and order, but it does not describe those reasons.
The court reversed the agency decision and sent the action back to the Commissioner for further administrative proceedings, a new hearing, and a new decision. The judgment does not explain the underlying dispute or identify any specific error.
The court also denied Lachenal’s motion for judgment on the pleadings without prejudice as moot. Judge Roman is identified as the assigned judge; the judgment was entered by the Acting Clerk of Court on September 16, 2024.
The detailed version
- Lachenal v. O'Malley · No. 7:24-cv-03839
- Nelson Roman
- Sept. 16, 2024
Background
William Gardner Lachenal brought this Social Security action against Martin O’Malley, Commissioner of Social Security. The judgment refers to a stipulation and order dated September 12, 2024, as stating the reasons for the court’s action. The provided judgment does not describe the underlying benefits dispute or the specific grounds for relief.
Court’s action
The court ordered, adjudged, and decreed that the action was reversed and remanded to the Commissioner of Social Security under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). The remand requires further administrative proceedings, a new hearing, and issuance of a new decision. A sentence-four remand is a court order sending a Social Security case back to the agency after judicial review.
The court denied Lachenal’s motion for judgment on the pleadings without prejudice as moot. Judge Roman is identified as the judge in the case information provided, while the judgment itself was entered by Daniel Ortiz, Acting Clerk of Court, on September 16, 2024.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.