Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Substantive rulingFiled Apr. 18, 2025

Garay v. Commissioner of Social Security

Judge
Robert Lehrburger
Docket
1:24-cv-06927
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Social SecurityCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Garay v. Commissioner of Social Security, Judge Lehrburger reversed the Commissioner’s decision and remanded the case for further proceedings and a new decision.

Who this affects

Jesus A. Garay and the Commissioner of Social Security; the case returns to the Social Security Administration for further proceedings and a new decision.

What happened

Garay v. Commissioner of Social Security concerns Jesus A. Garay’s challenge to a decision by the Commissioner of Social Security. The judgment does not describe the underlying dispute or explain the specific reasons for the reversal; it refers to a stipulation and order dated April 17, 2025.

The court reversed the Commissioner’s decision and sent the case back to the Commissioner for additional administrative proceedings and a new decision. On remand, Garay will be offered an opportunity for a hearing.

Judge Lehrburger’s court entered the judgment on April 18, 2025, under the fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).

The detailed version

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

Case
Garay v. Commissioner of Social Security · No. 1:24-cv-06927
Judge
Robert Lehrburger
Date
Apr. 18, 2025

Background

Jesus A. Garay sued the Commissioner of Social Security. The judgment does not state the underlying facts, the specific issue presented, or the reasons for the Commissioner’s decision. It states that the court’s action is based on a stipulation and order dated April 17, 2025, but that document is not included in the provided opinion text.

Ruling

The court reversed the Commissioner’s decision and remanded the action to the Commissioner under the fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). A remand sends the case back to the agency for further administrative proceedings. The Commissioner must issue a new decision, and Garay will be offered an opportunity for a hearing.

Disposition

The judgment ordered that the Commissioner’s decision be reversed and that the case be remanded for further administrative proceedings and a new decision. The judgment does not state the result the new proceedings must reach.

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.