Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Substantive rulingFiled Jan. 20, 2021

Martin v. Commissioner of Social Security

Judge
Analisa Torres
Docket
1:20-cv-01003
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Social SecurityCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Martin v. Commissioner of Social Security, Judge Torres granted remand and sent Martin’s case back to an administrative law judge for further proceedings.

Who this affects

Tenasia Patricia Martin’s Social Security case was sent back to an administrative law judge for further proceedings; the Commissioner’s motion to remand was granted.

What happened

In Martin v. Commissioner of Social Security, the court reviewed a report and recommendation after receiving no objections. The order does not describe the underlying Social Security dispute or the report’s reasoning.

The court found no clear error, adopted the report and recommendation in full, and granted the Commissioner’s motion for judgment on the pleadings to remand. The case was sent back to an administrative law judge for further proceedings consistent with the report and recommendation, and the court closed the case.

Judge Analisa Torres issued the order on January 20, 2021. The clerk was directed to terminate the motion, close the case, and mail the order to plaintiff Tenasia Patricia Martin, who was proceeding without a lawyer.

The detailed version

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

Case
Martin v. Commissioner of Social Security · No. 1:20-cv-01003
Judge
Analisa Torres
Date
Jan. 20, 2021

Background

The order concerns a report and recommendation prepared by Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron. No party filed objections. The order itself does not state the underlying arguments, the administrative law judge’s decision, or the report and recommendation’s detailed reasoning.

Court’s Review

Because there were no objections, the court reviewed the report and recommendation for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake. The court found no clear error and adopted the report and recommendation in its entirety.

Ruling and Disposition

The court granted the defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings to remand. 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 clerk was directed to terminate the motion at ECF No. 20, close the case, and mail a copy of the order to plaintiff Tenasia Patricia Martin, who was proceeding without a lawyer.

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.