Arzu v. Commissioner of Social Security
- Vernon Broderick
- 1:19-cv-06451
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Arzu v. Saul, Judge Broderick granted Arzu’s motion, denied the Commissioner’s motion, and remanded for further proceedings.
Martha Young Arzu and the Commissioner of Social Security; the case returns for administrative proceedings in which the administrative law judge must reconsider the opinion evidence, including Dr. Haftel’s opinion, and reassess Arzu’s residual functional capacity.
What happened
In Arzu v. Commissioner of Social Security, Martha Young Arzu challenged the Social Security Commissioner’s decision denying her applications for Disability Insurance Benefits and Supplemental Security Income. She asked the court to overturn that decision and send the case back for additional administrative proceedings; the Commissioner asked the court to affirm the decision.
A magistrate judge recommended sending the case back so that the administrative law judge could reconsider the medical opinion evidence, including Dr. Haftel’s opinion about Arzu’s functional limitations, and then reassess Arzu’s ability to work. Neither side objected to that recommendation.
Judge Broderick found no clear error, adopted the recommendation in full, granted Arzu’s motion for judgment on the pleadings, denied the Commissioner’s motion, and remanded the case for further proceedings.
The detailed version
- Arzu v. Commissioner of Social Security · No. 1:19-cv-06451
- Vernon Broderick
- May 12, 2021
Background
Martha Young Arzu sought judicial review under the Social Security Act of the Commissioner’s final decision denying her applications for Disability Insurance Benefits and Supplemental Security Income. Arzu moved for judgment on the pleadings, asking the court to vacate the Commissioner’s decision and remand the case for additional administrative proceedings. The Commissioner cross-moved for judgment on the pleadings, asking the court to affirm the decision.
The case was referred to Magistrate Judge Barbara C. Moses, who issued a Report and Recommendation on November 20, 2020. The report recommended remanding the case so that the administrative law judge could reconsider the weight given to the opinion evidence, including Dr. Haftel’s opinion about Arzu’s functional limitations, and then reassess Arzu’s residual functional capacity, meaning her ability to perform work-related activities.
Court’s Review
Neither party objected to the Report and Recommendation. The court therefore reviewed it for clear error. Judge Broderick stated that, after reviewing the report and the record, he found no clear error and adopted the recommendation in its entirety.
Ruling
The court granted Arzu’s motion for judgment on the pleadings and denied the Commissioner’s motion for judgment on the pleadings. It remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with the Report and Recommendation. The Clerk’s Office was directed to terminate the two motions and enter judgment remanding the case.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.