David Rudykoff v. Kenneth S. Apfel, Commissioner of Social Security
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
1Per curiam
David Rudykoff, appellant pro se, challenged the constitutionality of the Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 415(a)(7). After exhausting his administrative remedies before. the Social Security Administration (SSA), Rudykoff brought an action in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York seeking review of the decision to reduce his benefits pursuant to the WEP. Rudykoff now appeals the district court’s affirmance of the reduction of his benefits, claiming that the WEP unconstitutionally discriminates against retired federal…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Dandridge v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Jefferson v. HackneySupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Maxine Clark v. Commissioner of Social SecurityCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1998
- Mathews v. De CastroSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Satyendranath DAS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES, Defendant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1994
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Ralph Stroup v. Jo Ane B. BarnhartCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2003
- Kamyk v. BerryhillCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2017
- Bowman v. BarnhartDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 2002
- Linza v. SaulCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2021