Morris v. The United States of America

Background

Keith S. Morris, a New York County resident proceeding without a lawyer, filed what he called a “Writ of Assistance.” He asked the court to consolidate this action with his proceedings before the Social Security Administration (SSA). His allegations concerned delays, a vocational hearing, the withholding of Social Security benefits, and alleged unfairness or hazards connected with the hearing.

The defendants named in the opinion were William Barr, Nancy A. Berryhill, Andrew Saul, President Donald J. Trump, and the United States of America. The court had previously allowed Morris to proceed without paying the filing fee in advance.

Social Security jurisdiction

The court explained that federal courts may review a Social Security claim under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) only after the SSA Commissioner has issued a final decision made after a hearing. The required administrative review generally includes an initial determination, a request for reconsideration, a hearing before an administrative law judge, and review by the Appeals Council.

The court found that Morris’s request to consolidate this case with his SSA proceedings suggested that he had not completed that process or received a final decision from the Commissioner. Morris also did not allege facts showing that the exhaustion requirement should be excused. As a result, the court held that his claims concerning his right to benefits could not proceed at that time.

Because the nature of Morris’s claims was unclear and a valid claim might be stated, the court granted him leave to amend. The court directed him to explain whether he had completed the SSA review process or to provide facts supporting an exception to that requirement.

Federal immunity

The court also held that federal sovereign immunity generally prevents suits seeking monetary damages from the federal government unless the government has waived that immunity. The same protection generally applies to federal officers sued in their official capacities. The court found that Morris had not alleged facts showing that the defendants were personally involved in violating his rights.

The court therefore dismissed Morris’s claims against the United States Government, William Barr, Nancy A. Berryhill, and President Donald Trump. The order did not dismiss the claims against Andrew Saul, identified in the opinion as the current Commissioner of the SSA; instead, it allowed Morris to amend his complaint against the Commissioner.

Required amendment and disposition

The court required any amended complaint to use the Social Security complaint form and to include the date of the administrative law judge’s decision, the date of the Appeals Council letter, the date Morris received that letter, and a copy of the letter. If Morris had not exhausted his administrative remedies, he had to include facts explaining why the failure should be excused.

The amended complaint would replace the original complaint rather than supplement it, so any facts or claims Morris wished to maintain had to be included in the new filing. The court granted 60 days to file it, directed Morris to label it “Amended Complaint” and include docket number 20-CV-2015 (LLS), and stated that no summons would issue at that time. The order further stated that failure to comply, absent good cause, would result in dismissal for failure to state a claim on which relief could be granted.