Gadayeva v. Commissioner of Social Security

Justia Dockets & Filings Second Circuit New York Eastern District Gadayeva v. Commissioner of Social Security

Gadayeva v. Commissioner of Social Security

Plaintiff:	Mireom Gadayeva
Defendant:	Commissioner of Social Security
Case Number:	1:2011cv02961
Filed:	June 16, 2011
Court:	US District Court for the Eastern District of New York
Office:	Brooklyn Office
Presiding Judge:	Brian M. Cogan
Nature of Suit:	Social Security: DIWC/DIWW
Cause of Action:	42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
December 13, 2012	Filing 31 MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER, For these reasons, the case is remanded for further hearings before the ALJ. If the ALJ concludes that pltff is not without fault, she shall make specific findings as to the following questions: (1) did pltff have actua l knowledge of her obligation to report her husband's income and the fact that her husband's bank accounts exceeded the $3000 limit for SSI eligibility from October 2000 through November 2001 and April through June 2002; (2) if not, di d pltff have the mental ability and proficiency in English to have understood her obligation to affirmatively report these changes. As to both questions, the ALJ shall refer to specific evidence in the record to support the findings. Deft's 22 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings is denied and the case is remanded for further hearings before the Administrative Law Judge. (Ordered by Judge Brian M. Cogan on 12/12/2012) c/m by Chambers with Unpublished Decision. Fwd. for Judgment. (Galeano, Sonia)

Date Filed

Document Text

December 13, 2012

Filing 31 MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER, For these reasons, the case is remanded for further hearings before the ALJ. If the ALJ concludes that pltff is not without fault, she shall make specific findings as to the following questions: (1) did pltff have actua l knowledge of her obligation to report her husband's income and the fact that her husband's bank accounts exceeded the $3000 limit for SSI eligibility from October 2000 through November 2001 and April through June 2002; (2) if not, di d pltff have the mental ability and proficiency in English to have understood her obligation to affirmatively report these changes. As to both questions, the ALJ shall refer to specific evidence in the record to support the findings. Deft's 22 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings is denied and the case is remanded for further hearings before the Administrative Law Judge. (Ordered by Judge Brian M. Cogan on 12/12/2012) c/m by Chambers with Unpublished Decision. Fwd. for Judgment. (Galeano, Sonia)

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the New York Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Gadayeva v. Commissioner of Social Security
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Mireom Gadayeva
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: Commissioner of Social Security
Represented By:	Christopher John Brackett
Represented By:	SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION - GENERIC
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?