Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
D. Minn.Substantive rulingFiled Mar. 25, 2020

Scott K. v. Saul

Judge
Wilhelmina Wright
Docket
0:19-cv-02276
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
2
Social SecuritySummary Judgment
In one sentence

In Scott K. v. Saul, Judge Wright granted the Commissioner’s remand motion, partly granted Scott K.’s summary-judgment motion, and sent the case back for further proceedings.

Who this affects

Scott K. and Andrew Saul, in his capacity as Commissioner of Social Security; the case returns to the Social Security Administration for further proceedings.

What happened

Scott K. v. Saul involved the court’s review of a magistrate judge’s recommendation concerning the case. Neither side objected to the recommendation.

The court adopted the recommendation, granted Andrew Saul’s motion to send the case back, and granted Scott K.’s summary-judgment motion in part to the extent it requested that result. The case was remanded to the Social Security Administration for further proceedings.

Judge Wilhelmina M. Wright found no clear error in the recommendation and ordered judgment accordingly.

The detailed version

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

Case
Scott K. v. Saul · No. 0:19-cv-02276
Judge
Wilhelmina Wright
Date
Mar. 25, 2020

Background

The court reviewed a February 19, 2020 report and recommendation by United States Magistrate Judge Katherine M. Menendez. Andrew Saul filed a notice stating that he did not object, and Scott K. also did not object. When no party objects, the court reviews the recommendation for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake.

Rulings

The court found no clear error and adopted the report and recommendation. It granted Andrew Saul’s motion for remand, meaning that it sent the case back to the Social Security Administration. It also granted Scott K.’s motion for summary judgment in part, but only to the extent that the motion sought remand for further proceedings.

Disposition

The case was remanded to the Social Security Administration for further proceedings under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). The court ordered that judgment be entered accordingly.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.