Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Substantive rulingFiled June 19, 2020

Cirelli v. Commissioner of Social Security

Judge
Edgardo Ramos
Docket
1:19-cv-02709
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Social SecurityCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Cirelli v. Commissioner, Judge Ramos granted in part and denied in part Cirelli’s motion, denied the Commissioner’s motion, and ordered further proceedings.

Who this affects

Christopher Cirelli’s application for disability insurance benefits was sent back to the Commissioner for further proceedings.

What happened

In Cirelli v. Commissioner of Social Security, Christopher Cirelli challenged the decision denying his application for disability insurance benefits. Both sides asked the court to decide the case based on the existing pleadings.

A magistrate judge recommended granting in part and denying in part Cirelli’s motion, denying the Commissioner’s motion, vacating the benefits decision, and sending the case back for further proceedings. Neither side objected within the allowed fourteen days.

Judge Edgardo Ramos found no error and adopted the recommendation in full. The court granted in part and denied in part Cirelli’s motion, denied the Commissioner’s motion, vacated the Commissioner’s decision, and remanded the case for further proceedings.

The detailed version

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

Case
Cirelli v. Commissioner of Social Security · No. 1:19-cv-02709
Judge
Edgardo Ramos
Date
June 19, 2020

Background

Christopher Cirelli brought this action under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), which permits judicial review of a Social Security benefits decision. He challenged the Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of his application for disability insurance benefits. The parties filed cross-motions for judgment on the pleadings under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c), asking the court to decide the case based on the pleadings.

Report and Recommendation

On May 7, 2020, Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron issued a Report and Recommendation. It recommended that Cirelli’s motion be granted in part and denied in part, that the Commissioner’s motion be denied in its entirety, that the Commissioner’s decision be vacated, and that the case be remanded for further proceedings. The parties had fourteen days to file written objections, but neither party filed an objection.

Court’s Review and Ruling

Because no objections were filed, the district court could adopt the uncontested portions of the recommendation unless clear error appeared. The court reviewed the Report and Recommendation, found no error, and adopted Judge Aaron’s recommendations in their entirety.

The court granted in part and denied in part Cirelli’s motion for judgment on the pleadings; denied the Commissioner’s motion for judgment on the pleadings; vacated the Commissioner’s decision; and remanded the case for further proceedings. The Clerk was directed to terminate the motions and close the case.

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.