Khan v. Astrue

Khan v. Astrue

Plaintiff:	Michelle Khan
Defendant:	Michael J. Astrue
Case Number:	1:2011cv05118
Filed:	October 20, 2011
Court:	US District Court for the Eastern District of New York
Office:	Brooklyn Office
Presiding Judge:	Dora Lizette Irizarry
Nature of Suit:	Social Security: SSID Tit. XVI
Cause of Action:	42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
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
July 30, 2013	Filing 24 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER denying 17 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and granting 19 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. For the reasons set forth in the attached Memorandum and Order, Defendant's motion for judgment on the pleadings is denied. Plaintiff's cross motion for judgment on the pleadings is granted. The Court finds that the ALJ committed legal error when she failed to fulfill her affirmative duty to develop the record before determining the weight to give the opin ion of Plaintiff's treating psychiatrist Dr. Galal. The ALJ also failed to properly assess Plaintiff's credibility in determining her mental impairment and to properly account for Plaintiff's mental impairment in the RFC determination . The Commissioner's decision is reversed and this action is remanded for further administrative proceedings pursuant to the fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. Ordered by Judge Margo K. Brodie on 7/30/2013. (Thomas, Alora)

Date Filed

Document Text

July 30, 2013

Filing 24 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER denying 17 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and granting 19 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. For the reasons set forth in the attached Memorandum and Order, Defendant's motion for judgment on the pleadings is denied. Plaintiff's cross motion for judgment on the pleadings is granted. The Court finds that the ALJ committed legal error when she failed to fulfill her affirmative duty to develop the record before determining the weight to give the opin ion of Plaintiff's treating psychiatrist Dr. Galal. The ALJ also failed to properly assess Plaintiff's credibility in determining her mental impairment and to properly account for Plaintiff's mental impairment in the RFC determination . The Commissioner's decision is reversed and this action is remanded for further administrative proceedings pursuant to the fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. Ordered by Judge Margo K. Brodie on 7/30/2013. (Thomas, Alora)

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: Khan v. Astrue
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Michelle Khan
Represented By:	WIlliam D. Kaplan
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: Michael J. Astrue
Represented By:	Kathleen Anne Mahoney
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?