Cruz v. Commissioner of Social Security
- Lorna Schofield
- 1:19-cv-07474-LGS-GRJ
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Cruz v. Commissioner, Judge Schofield granted Cruz’s motion, denied the Commissioner’s motion, and remanded for calculation of benefits.
Diana Cruz and the Commissioner of Social Security; the case was remanded for calculation of benefits.
What happened
In Cruz v. Commissioner of Social Security, Diana Cruz and the Commissioner filed competing requests asking the court to decide the case based on the existing record. The case had previously been sent back for additional administrative proceedings.
After those proceedings, a magistrate judge recommended granting Cruz’s request, denying the Commissioner’s request, and sending the case back so benefits could be calculated. No timely objections were filed.
Judge Schofield adopted the recommendation in full, granted Cruz’s motion for judgment on the pleadings, denied the Commissioner’s cross-motion, and remanded the case for calculation of benefits.
The detailed version
- Cruz v. Commissioner of Social Security · No. 1:19-cv-07474-LGS-GRJ
- Lorna Schofield
- June 3, 2022
Background
Diana Cruz began the case on August 9, 2019. The parties filed competing motions for judgment on the pleadings, which ask the court to decide a case based on the administrative record and the parties’ written submissions. The court previously adopted a magistrate judge’s recommendation and sent the case back for further administrative proceedings under sentence six of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).
After those proceedings, Cruz moved for judgment on the pleadings on November 10, 2021. The Commissioner of Social Security filed a cross-motion on February 14, 2022. Magistrate Judge Gary Jones issued a report and recommendation advising that Cruz’s motion be granted, the Commissioner’s motion be denied, and the case be remanded under sentence four of Section 405(g) for calculation of benefits.
Court’s Review
No timely objections were filed to the report and recommendation. In that situation, the district court reviews the record for clear error before adopting the recommendation. Judge Schofield stated that she found no error, clear or otherwise, in Judge Jones’s thorough and well-reasoned report.
Ruling
The court adopted the report and recommendation in its entirety. It granted Cruz’s motion for judgment on the pleadings, denied the Commissioner’s motion for judgment on the pleadings, and remanded the case for calculation of benefits. The Clerk of Court was asked to close the two motions.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.