Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Substantive rulingFiled Aug. 25, 2020

Parker v. Saul

Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Docket
1:19-cv-07139
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Social SecurityCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Parker v. Commissioner of Social Security, Judge Abrams adopted the recommendation, vacated the benefits denial, and sent the case back for further proceedings.

Who this affects

Camean Parker and the Commissioner of Social Security; the agency must conduct further administrative proceedings after the court vacated the benefits-denial decision.

What happened

Camean Parker v. Commissioner of Social Security concerned Parker’s request for court review of the agency’s decision denying his application for disability insurance benefits. Magistrate Judge Sarah Cave recommended ruling for Parker and sending the matter back for more administrative proceedings.

Neither side objected to the recommendation. The district court therefore reviewed it for clear error and found none.

Judge Ronnie Abrams adopted the recommendation in full. The court granted Parker’s motion for judgment on the pleadings, denied the Commissioner’s motion, vacated the decision denying benefits, and remanded the case to the agency for further administrative proceedings.

The detailed version

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

Case
Parker v. Saul · No. 1:19-cv-07139
Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Date
Aug. 25, 2020

Background

Camean Parker sued under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), which permits judicial review of a Social Security benefits decision. Parker challenged the Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of his application for disability insurance benefits.

Magistrate Judge Sarah Cave issued a Report and Recommendation on July 31, 2020. The report recommended granting Parker’s motion for judgment on the pleadings, denying the Commissioner’s cross-motion for judgment on the pleadings, vacating the decision denying benefits, and remanding the case to the agency for further administrative proceedings.

Review of the Recommendation

Neither party objected to the report. Because there were no objections, the district court reviewed the report for clear error—that is, an obvious mistake in the record. The court found no error after reviewing the record and exhibits submitted with the complaint.

Ruling

The court adopted the Report and Recommendation in its entirety. Judge Ronnie Abrams granted Parker’s motion for judgment on the pleadings, denied the Commissioner’s motion for judgment on the pleadings, vacated the Commissioner’s decision denying benefits, and remanded the action to the agency for further administrative proceedings. The clerk was directed to terminate the pending 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.