Legal Opinion
Vasquez-Ortiz v. Apfel
District Court, W.D. New York
Decided February 26, 1999No. 1:97-cv-00090PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DECISION & ORDER
HECKMAN, United States Magistrate Judge.
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), the parties have consented to have the undersigned conduct any and all further proceedings in the above captioned matter (Item 24). Plaintiff commenced this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) in order to challenge the determination of the Social Security Appeals Council. Both plaintiff and defendant move for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Rule 12(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (Items 12, 15, 18). Defendant also moves to amend the prior motion for judgment on…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Richardson v. PeralesSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Rita Schaal v. Kenneth S. Apfel, Commissioner of Social Security, 1 Dockets 96-6212, 96-6316Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1998
- Patrick Balsamo v. Shirley S. Chater, Commissioner of Social SecurityCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1998
- Herbert Carroll v. Secretary of Health and Human ServicesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1983
- Mozell Grey v. Margaret M. Heckler, Secretary of Health and Human ServicesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1983
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- BASZTO v. AstrueDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 2010
- Burnette v. ColvinCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2014
- Maneti v. Commissioner of Social SecurityDistrict Court, W.D. New York · 2019
- O'Brien v. Commissioner of Social SecurityDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 2020
- Persio M. v. Frank Bisignano, Commissioner of Social SecurityDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2026
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.