Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

D.L.K. v. Commissioner of Social Security

United States District Court, N.D. New York

May 5, 2017

D.L.K. a minor, by SABRINA BRINK, Plaintiff,
v.
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY Defendant.

         APPEARANCES:

          LAW OFFICE OF PETER MARGOLIUS Counsel for Plaintiff

          U.S. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMIN. OFFICE OF REG'L GEN. COUNSEL-REGION II Counsel for Defendant

         OF COUNSEL:

          PETER MARGOLIUS, ESQ. ELIZABETH ROTHSTEIN, ESQ.

          MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER

          William B. Mitchell Carter, U.S. Magistrate Judge

         This matter was referred to me, for all proceedings and entry of a final judgment, pursuant to the Social Security Pilot Program, N.D.N.Y. General Order No. 18, and in accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), Fed.R.Civ.P. 73, N.D.N.Y. Local Rule 73.1 and the consent of the parties. (Dkt. Nos. 4, 14)

         Currently before the Court, in this Social Security action filed by Sabrina Brink (“Plaintiff”) on behalf of her minor step-son, D.L.K. (“Claimant”) against the Commissioner of Social Security (“Defendant” or “the Commissioner”) pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), are the parties' cross-motions for judgment on the pleadings. (Dkt. Nos. 11, 12.) For the reasons set forth below, it is ordered that Plaintiff's motion be denied and Defendant's motion be granted.

         I. RELEVANT BACKGROUND

         A. Factual Background

         At the time of filing and at the time of his hearing, Claimant was a school aged child. (T. 15); 20 C.F.R. § 416.926a(g)(2). Claimant's alleged disability consists of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (“ADHD”). (T. 128.)

         B. Procedural History

         On February 7, 2013, Plaintiff applied for Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”) under Title XVI of the Social Security Act on Claimant's behalf. (T. 50.) Plaintiff's application was initially denied, after which she timely requested a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge (“the ALJ”). On July 30, 3014 Plaintiff and Claimant appeared before the ALJ, Robert Wright. (T. 29-49.) On October 8, 2014, ALJ Wright issued a written decision finding Claimant not disabled under the Social Security Act. (T. 9-27.) On May 25, 2016, the Appeals Council (“AC”) denied Plaintiff's request for review, rendering the ALJ's decision the final decision of the Commissioner. (T. 1-6.) Thereafter, Plaintiff timely sought judicial review in this Court.

         C. The ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.