Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Substantive rulingFiled Dec. 14, 2020

Williams v. Commissioner of Social Security

Judge
Analisa Torres
Docket
1:19-cv-10443
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Social SecurityCivil Procedure
In one sentence

Williams v. Commissioner of Social Security: Judge Torres remanded the case after adopting the recommendation, granting Williams’s motion and denying the Commissioner’s motion.

Who this affects

Adera Williams and the Commissioner of Social Security; the matter returns to the administrative law judge for further proceedings.

What happened

In Williams v. Commissioner of Social Security, the court considered a report and recommendation concerning the parties’ motions in this Social Security case.

No party objected to the report and recommendation. The court reviewed it for clear error and found none, but the opinion does not describe the report’s underlying reasoning.

Judge Analisa Torres adopted the report and recommendation in full, denied the Commissioner’s motion for judgment on the pleadings, granted Williams’s motion, and remanded the matter to the administrative law judge for further proceedings. The court directed the Clerk to terminate the motions and close the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Williams v. Commissioner of Social Security · No. 1:19-cv-10443
Judge
Analisa Torres
Date
Dec. 14, 2020

Background

Adera Williams and the Commissioner of Social Security filed competing motions. The opinion does not state the underlying facts or explain the arguments presented in those motions.

Report and Recommendation

The court had received a report and recommendation from Magistrate Judge James L. Cott. Because no objections were filed, Judge Analisa Torres reviewed the report for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake, and found none. The court adopted the report and recommendation in its entirety.

Ruling

The court denied the Commissioner’s motion for judgment on the pleadings, granted Williams’s motion, and 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 Clerk of Court was directed to terminate the motions listed at ECF Nos. 20 and 22 and close the case.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-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.