Smith v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration
- Sarah Netburn
- 1:24-cv-09401
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Smith v. Commissioner, Judge Netburn reversed the Commissioner’s decision and remanded Schenellsmith’s case for further administrative proceedings.
SCHENELLSMITH, SSS and the Commissioner of Social Security; the Commissioner must conduct further administrative proceedings after the reversal and remand.
What happened
Schenellsmith, SSS challenged a decision by the Commissioner of Social Security in Smith v. Commissioner. The opinion does not explain the underlying dispute or the reasons for the challenge.
The court stated that, based on a June 24, 2025 stipulation and order, the Commissioner’s decision was reversed. The case was sent back to the Commissioner for further administrative proceedings.
Judge Sarah Netburn is identified for Smith v. Commissioner. The judgment was dated June 25, 2025, and does not describe what issues the Commissioner must address on remand.
The detailed version
- Smith v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration · No. 1:24-cv-09401
- Sarah Netburn
- June 25, 2025
Background
The opinion is a judgment in an action brought by SCHENELLSMITH, SSS against the Commissioner of Social Security. The provided judgment does not state the underlying facts, the specific Social Security benefits issue, or the reasons for challenging the Commissioner’s decision.
Court’s action
The judgment states that, for the reasons given in the court’s stipulation and order dated June 24, 2025, the Commissioner’s decision was reversed. It further states that the action was remanded to the Commissioner under the fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further administrative proceedings. The judgment cites Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292 (1993).
Result
The Commissioner’s decision was reversed, and the action was remanded for further administrative proceedings. The judgment does not specify the issues to be reconsidered or otherwise explain the basis for the reversal.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.