Lavalle v. Commissioner of Social Security
- Lorna Schofield
- 1:23-cv-03012
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Lavalle v. Commissioner of Social Security, Judge Schofield reversed and remanded the action for further agency proceedings, including a new hearing and decision.
Lavalle and the Social Security Administration are affected: the action was reversed and remanded, requiring further administrative proceedings, a new hearing opportunity, and a new decision.
What happened
Lavalle sued the Commissioner of Social Security in the Southern District of New York. The judgment does not describe the underlying dispute or the reasons for the requested relief.
The court stated that, for the reasons given in a November 21, 2023, stipulation and order, the action was reversed and sent back to the Commissioner for further administrative proceedings. The Administrative Law Judge must offer Lavalle a new hearing and issue a new decision.
Judge Schofield is identified in the case information as the judge. The judgment was dated November 21, 2023, and states that the remand was made under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).
The detailed version
- Lavalle v. Commissioner of Social Security · No. 1:23-cv-03012
- Lorna Schofield
- Nov. 21, 2023
Background
Lavalle brought this Social Security action against Kilolo Kijakazi, identified in the caption as the Acting Commissioner of Social Security. The provided judgment does not explain the underlying benefits dispute, the arguments, or the Administrative Law Judge’s earlier decision. It refers to a stipulation and order dated November 21, 2023, as the source of the reasons for the disposition.
Ruling
The court ordered that the action be reversed and remanded to the Commissioner for further administrative proceedings under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). On remand, the Administrative Law Judge must offer Lavalle the opportunity for a new hearing and issue a new decision. The judgment cites Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292 (1993).
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.