Richard M. v. O'Malley

Background

This Social Security case had been stayed on February 13, 2020, while the Eighth Circuit considered related appeals concerning challenges under the Constitution’s Appointments Clause. That Clause governs the appointment of certain federal officials, including the administrative-law judge whose appointment was challenged in this case. The Eighth Circuit later issued decisions in the related Davis and Hilliard matters, concluding that the claimants had waived or failed to preserve their Appointments Clause challenges.

The Parties’ Positions

Counsel for Richard M. asked the court to continue the stay until the Eighth Circuit decided another group of consolidated appeals: Smith, Millard, and Taylor. Counsel also suggested that another stay might be appropriate because additional appeals in Davis and Hilliard were likely. The Commissioner argued that the court should rely on Davis and conclude that Richard M. had forfeited his Appointments Clause claim.

The Court’s Reasoning

The court decided that waiting to resolve the parties’ summary-judgment motions until after the Eighth Circuit ruled in the Smith, Millard, and Taylor appeals would simplify the issues, conserve judicial resources, and would not severely prejudice Richard M. The opinion did not decide the merits of the Appointments Clause claim or the summary-judgment motions.

Disposition

Judge Katherine Menendez ordered that the matter be stayed pending the outcome of the consolidated appeals in Smith, Millard, and Taylor. The parties must contact the court within 14 days after the Eighth Circuit issues its decision to request lifting the stay or other relief. The court will determine whether supplemental briefing on the Appointments Clause issue is necessary after receiving the parties’ required status updates.