Lanza v. Berryhill
- Analisa Torres
- 1:19-cv-06783
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Lanza v. Berryhill, Judge Torres denied the Commissioner’s motion, granted Lanza’s motion, and remanded the Social Security case for further proceedings.
Richard F. Lanza and Nancy A. Berryhill, identified as Acting Commissioner of Social Security; the matter was returned to the administrative law judge for further proceedings.
What happened
In Lanza v. Berryhill, Richard F. Lanza challenged the Social Security decision, and the court considered the parties’ motions for judgment on the pleadings.
The court found no clear error in the magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation because neither side objected. It adopted that recommendation in full, denied the defendant’s motion, granted Lanza’s motion, and sent the matter back to the administrative law judge for further proceedings. The case was closed.
Judge Analisa Torres issued the underlying order on September 18, 2020, and the judgment states these dispositions followed that order.
The detailed version
- Lanza v. Berryhill · No. 1:19-cv-06783
- Analisa Torres
- Sept. 18, 2020
Background
Richard F. Lanza was the plaintiff, and Nancy A. Berryhill, identified in the caption as Acting Commissioner of Social Security, was the defendant. The judgment concerns the parties’ motions for judgment on the pleadings, but the judgment does not describe the underlying dispute or the specific reasoning in the Report and Recommendation.
Court’s review
The court stated that it had received no objections to the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Robert W. Lehrburger. The court therefore reviewed the recommendation for clear error and found none. It adopted the Report and Recommendation in its entirety.
Ruling and disposition
The court denied the defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings and granted the plaintiff’s motion. It remanded the matter to the administrative law judge under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further proceedings consistent with the Report and Recommendation. The judgment also stated that the case was closed.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.