Legal Opinion
Pronti v. Barnhart
District Court, W.D. New York
Decided August 3, 2006No. 02-CV-6309L, 03-CV-6090L, 03-CV-6664LPublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DECISION AND ORDER
LARIMER, District Judge.
INTRODUCTION
These three cases, Pronti v. Commissioner (02-CV-6309L) (“Pronti”), Ballard v. Commissioner (03-CV-6090L) (“Ballard”), and Zimmerman v. Commissioner (“Zimmerman”) (03-CV-6664L), joined for purposes of this decision, have raised one of the most serious claims that a litigant can make: that the judge, in this case an administrative law judge, was biased against them. These plaintiffs, together with several other similarly situated plaintiffs, sought Social Security benefits. Their requests were initially denied. They appealed and had an…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Shalala v. SchaeferSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Powell v. McCormackSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Maryland Casualty Co. v. Pacific Coal & Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
- County of Los Angeles v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Public Serv. Comm'n of Utah v. Wycoff Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1952
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Steficek v. BarnhartDistrict Court, W.D. New York · 2006
- Ballard v. AstrueDistrict Court, W.D. New York · 2007
- Faltisko v. Commissioner of Social SecurityDistrict Court, W.D. New York · 2024
- Hogan v. AstrueDistrict Court, W.D. New York · 2012
- Parvon v. Commissioner of Social SecurityDistrict Court, W.D. New York · 2020