Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Substantive rulingFiled Feb. 25, 2025

Lederer v. Commissioner of Social Security

Judge
Jesse Furman
Docket
1:24-cv-06525
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Social SecurityCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Lederer v. Commissioner, Judge Furman ordered the case reversed and remanded for further proceedings and a new decision.

Who this affects

Libra Lederer and the Social Security Commissioner; the Commissioner must conduct further administrative proceedings and issue a new decision.

What happened

In Lederer v. Commissioner of Social Security, the court entered judgment sending the case back to the Social Security Commissioner.

The order states that the remand was based on the parties’ February 24, 2025 stipulation and order. The opinion does not describe the underlying dispute or explain the reasons for the remand.

Judge Jesse Furman’s court ordered the action reversed and remanded under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further administrative proceedings and a new decision. The case was closed.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Lederer v. Commissioner of Social Security · No. 1:24-cv-06525
Judge
Jesse Furman
Date
Feb. 25, 2025

Background

The judgment identifies Libra Lederer as the plaintiff and the Acting Commissioner of Social Security as the defendant. It does not provide facts about the underlying Social Security dispute. It states that the court’s action was based on a stipulation and order dated February 24, 2025.

Ruling

The court ordered that the action be reversed and remanded to the Commissioner of Social Security under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). The remand is for further administrative proceedings and a new decision. The judgment cites Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292 (1993), and states that the case is closed. The judgment was dated February 25, 2025, and signed by the clerk of court on the court’s behalf.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.