Legal Opinion
Rawls v. Apfel
District Court, D. Massachusetts
Decided March 23, 1998No. CIV. A. 96-30260-MAPPublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
PONSOR, District Judge.
Upon de novo review this Report and Recommendation is hereby adopted. The defendant’s motion (Dkt. 8) is ALLOWED, in part, as to any SSDI claim. The plaintiffs motion to reverse is DENIED but the motion to remand is ALLOWED for consideration of ne;w, material evidence on the SSI claim.- So ordered.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION WITH REGARD TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO REVERSE OR REMAND THE DECISION OF THE COMMISSIONER (Docket No. 07) and DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO AFFIRM THE DECISION OF THE COMMISSIONER (Docket No. 8)
NEIMAN, United States Magistrate - Judge.
This matter is before…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Thomas v. ArnSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Richardson v. PeralesSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Consolidated Edison Co. v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Victor J. Irlanda Ortiz v. Secretary of Health and Human ServicesCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1991
- Maria S. Rodriguez v. Secretary of Health and Human ServicesCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1981
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Pilet v. ApfelDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1998
- Montalvo v. BarnhartDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 2003
- Cintrón-Rivera v. ColvinDistrict Court, D. Puerto Rico · 2015
- Martinez v. SaulDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 2022
- Mendez v. ColvinDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 2018
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.