Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Substantive rulingFiled June 30, 2025

Sawicki v. Commissioner of Social Security

Judge
Ona Wang
Docket
1:24-cv-08259
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Social SecurityCivil Procedure
In one sentence

Sawicki v. Commissioner: Judge Wang reversed the decision and remanded the Social Security case for further proceedings and a new decision.

Who this affects

The plaintiff acting on behalf of Michael J. Sawicki, deceased, and the Commissioner of Social Security; the Commissioner must conduct further administrative proceedings and issue a new decision.

What happened

In Sawicki v. Commissioner of Social Security, the court addressed a challenge to the Commissioner’s decision concerning Social Security benefits. The judgment states that the case involved a plaintiff acting on behalf of Michael J. Sawicki, deceased.

The court reversed the Commissioner’s decision and sent the case back to the Commissioner for further administrative proceedings and a new decision. The judgment does not explain the specific error or issue requiring the remand; it refers to a June 27, 2025, stipulation and order for the reasons.

Judge Ona Wang is identified in the case information. The judgment was dated June 30, 2025, and entered 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
Sawicki v. Commissioner of Social Security · No. 1:24-cv-08259
Judge
Ona Wang
Date
June 30, 2025

Background

The plaintiff brought this Social Security action on behalf of Michael J. Sawicki, deceased, against the Commissioner of Social Security. The judgment refers to a stipulation and order dated June 27, 2025, but the opinion text provided does not describe the underlying benefits dispute or the reasons for the parties’ stipulation.

Ruling

The court ordered that the Commissioner’s decision be reversed. It also ordered that the action be remanded to the Commissioner under the fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further administrative proceedings and a new decision. A remand sends the matter back to the agency for additional proceedings; this judgment does not state what result the Commissioner must reach.

Disposition

The judgment was dated June 30, 2025. The provided judgment identifies the ruling as based on the court’s June 27, 2025, stipulation and order and cites Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292 (1993).

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.