Brown v. Colvin, No. 3:2011cv01522 - Document 16 (N.D.N.Y 2013)
Court Description: DECISION AND ORDER adopting Magistrate Judge Bianchini's 15 Report and Recommendations; granting Plaintiff's motion for judgment on the pleadings; vacating the Commissioner's decision and remanding the matter for further consideration. Signed by Judge David N. Hurd on 7/8/2013. (amt)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Brown v. Colvin Doc. 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -------------------------------KELLY BROWN, Plaintiff, -v- 11-CV-1522 CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant. -------------------------------APPEARANCES: OF COUNSEL: LACHMAN & GORTON Attorneys for Plaintiff P.O. Box 89 1500 East Main Street Endicott, NY PETER A. GORTON, ESQ. OFFICE OF REGIONAL GENERAL COUNSEL Attorneys for Defendant Social Security Administration Region II 26 Federal Plaza, Room 3904 New York, NY 10278 DAVID L. BROWN, ESQ. DAVID N. HURD United States District Judge DECISION and ORDER Plaintiff Kelly Brown filed this action seeking judicial review of the unfavorable portion of the Commissioner's decision which denied her some benefits under the Social Security Act. By Report-Recommendation dated March 6, 2013, the Honorable Victor E. Bianchini, Dockets.Justia.com United States Magistrate Judge, recommended that the Commissioner's motion for judgment on the pleadings be denied, plaintiff's motion be granted, and the case remanded for further proceedings. No objections to the Report-Recommendation were filed. Based upon a careful review of the entire file and the recommendations of the Magistrate Judge, the Report-Recommendation is accepted in whole. See 28 U.S.C. ยง 636(b)(1). Accordingly, it is ORDERED that 1. Plaintiff's motion for judgment on the pleadings is GRANTED; and 2. The Commissioner's decision is VACATED and the matter REMANDED for further consideration consistent with the Report-Recommendation. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: July 8, 2013 Utica, New York. -2-
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
