Legal Opinion
Colegrove v. Commissioner of Social Security
District Court, W.D. New York
Decided November 14, 2005No. 98-CV-6559LPublishedCited by 23 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DECISION AND ORDER
LARIMER, District Judge.
INTRODUCTION
This is an action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 405(g) and 1383(c) to review the final determination of the Commissioner of Social Security (“the Commissioner”) that Teresa Colegrove (“plaintiff’) is not disabled under the Social Security Act, and therefore, is not entitled to Social Security Disability Insurance (Title II) or Supplemental Security Income (Title XVI) benefits.
Both plaintiff and the Commissioner have moved for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(c). (Dkts.## 17 and 24). For the reasons discussed…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Richardson v. PeralesSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Consolidated Edison Co. v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Bowen v. City of New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Ysabel Rosa v. John S. Callahan, Acting Commissioner of Social SecurityCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1999
- Rita Schaal v. Kenneth S. Apfel, Commissioner of Social Security, 1 Dockets 96-6212, 96-6316Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1998
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- Mortise v. AstrueDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 2010
- Hamilton v. ColvinDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 2013
- Henry v. AstrueDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 2012
- Steficek v. BarnhartDistrict Court, W.D. New York · 2006
- Sweet v. AstrueDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 2012
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.