New York Attorneys JHA handles range the gamut of complex financial and commercial litigation and arbitration, including securities, RICO, corporate and contract disputes, credit default swaps, derivatives, and class, mass, and derivative actions. The firm also represents law firms in major disputes.

Commercial Litigation and Arbitration

New York Attorneys JHA handles range the gamut of complex financial and commercial litigation and arbitration, including securities, RICO, corporate and contract disputes, credit default swaps, derivatives, and class, mass, and derivative actions. The firm also represents law firms in major disputes.
Commercial Litigation and Arbitration
« Back to Complex Lit Blog

Internet Evidence — Municipal Government Program Accessed via Wayback Machine — Implicit Judicial Notice of Program’s Self-Description on Its Website as of 2011

Download PDF

Ferone v. Colvin, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 181826 (S.D.N.Y. June 17, 2016) (R&R):

I. Introduction

 

Plaintiff, Nanette L. Ferone, brings this action pursuant to Section 205(g) of the Social Security Act (the "Act"), 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), seeking judicial review of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security ("Commissioner") denying her applications for supplemental security income benefits ("SSI") and disability insurance benefits ("DIB"). Plaintiff has moved for judgment on the pleadings under Rule 12(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (Notice of Motion, dated December [*2]  19, 2014 (Docket Item 15)). The Commissioner has filed a cross-motion also seeking judgment on the pleadings (Notice of Motion, dated January 20, 2015 (Docket Item 17)).

 

For the reasons set forth below, I respectfully recommend that plaintiff's motion for judgment on the pleadings be denied and that the Commissioner's motion for judgment on the pleadings be granted.

II. Facts

A. Procedural Background

Plaintiff filed applications for SSI and DIB on June 30, 2011, alleging that she had been disabled since June 3, 2010 (Tr.1 151-68). The Social Security Administration denied plaintiff's applications, finding that she was not disabled (Tr. 59-60). Plaintiff timely requested and was granted a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge ("ALJ"). ALJ Patrick Kilgannon conducted a hearing on February 27, 2013 (Tr. 38-58). In a decision dated April 26, 2013, ALJ Kilgannon determined that plaintiff was not disabled within the meaning of the Act (Tr. 7-28). The ALJ's decision became the final decision of the Commissioner on May 27, 2014 when the Appeals Council denied plaintiff's request for review (Tr. 1-6). Plaintiff commenced this action seeking review of the Commissioner's decision on July 10, [*3]  2014 (Complaint (Docket Item 1)).

1   "Tr." refers to the administrative record that the Commissioner filed with her answer, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) (see Notice of Filing of Administrative Record, dated July 31, 2014 (Docket Item 9)).

B. Plaintiff's Social Background

Plaintiff was born in September 1960 (Tr. 184). She holds a high school diploma and speaks English (Tr. 188, 190). Plaintiff worked as a food vendor in 2002, a school assistant from 2003 to 2004, and a safety monitor at a family shelter from 2008 to 2010 (Tr. 190). She also briefly worked in a factory assembling products (Tr. 48). Plaintiff lived with her teenage daughter in a shelter in the Bronx, eventually obtaining her own housing by at least late 2012 (see Tr. 198, 272, 294, 559). Plaintiff claims disability based on psychiatric conditions that she contends stem from sexual harassment she experienced in the workplace in 2010 (Tr. 42).

In a March 2011 FEGS2 Biopsychosocial Summary, plaintiff reported that she was not interested in working and that she could not work because of her mental health conditions (Tr. 297). She stated that she had suffered abuse in the workplace in 2008 (Tr. 298). Plaintiff denied ever being hospitalized for [*4]  mental conditions and denied experiencing auditory hallucinations (Tr. 300). She also denied current suicidal ideation, but reported that she had experienced suicidal ideation in 2008 (Tr. 300). This report stated that plaintiff took the bus to her appointment and had no travel restrictions (Tr. 301). Plaintiff also reported that she participated in library services (Tr. 295)

2   Federal Employment and Guidance Service ("FEGS") WeCare is a New York City program that "help[s] [public] assistance applicants and recipients with complex clinical barriers to employment, including medical, mental health, and substance abuse conditions, to obtain employment or federal disability benefits." FEGS: WeCare, FEGS Health & Human Servs., http://www.fegs.org/ what-we-do/employment-workforce/jobseekers/wecare#.VYG22UbYhdB (accessed via the Internet Archive index).

Share this article:

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Email

Recent Posts

The Word “Include” May Be A Word of Limitation As Opposed to a Word of Enlargement, Depending on the Context

RICO — Pleading Conspiracy — Plaintiffs Must Plausibly Allege That the Defendants Knowingly Joined the RICO Conspiracy — Sparse Allegations of Knowledge of Fraud Due to Participation in a Commercial Transaction Insufficient to State RICO Conspiracy Claim Where Allegations Not Inconsistent with Ordinary Commercial Behavior — While Knowledge May Be Pled “Generally” under Rule 9(b), It Cannot Be Alleged Conclusorily and Must Satisfy the Twiqbal Plausibility Standard

Depositions: Improper to Object to Form to Straightforward Questions (Not Compound, Vague, Leading or Speculative) — Lack of Foundation Objection Improper in 30(b)(6) Deposition — Improper to “Educate” Witness During Breaks of 30(b)(6) Deposition Through Witness Calls to Knowledgeable Corporate Colleagues — Magistrate Judge May Impose Financial Sanctions

Spoliation/Sanctions: “A Party Does Not Spoliate Evidence When, Without Notice Of The Evidence’s Potential Relevance, It Destroys The Evidence According To Its Policy Or In The Normal Course Of Its Business” (Good Quote)

RICO: Fraud on Government Entities Causing Plaintiffs to Pay More for Inmate Calls Actionable on Bridge v. Phoenix Bond Analysis — Fact That Governments Had Separate Injuries As Part of the Scheme (from Reduced Commissions) Irrelevant — Plaintiffs’ Injuries Not Derivative of Governments’ — The Fraud on the Governments Was Not Too Distinct From Plaintiffs’ Injuries But Rather Necessary to Injure Plaintiffs — No Risk of Duplicative Recoveries and No Plaintiff Better Situated to Sue for Plaintiffs’ Injuries

Inherent Power Sanctions — Dismissal for Threatening Defendant and Magistrate Judge — No First Amendment Right to Threaten Violence

RICO: Domestic Injury — Delivery of Fraudulently Non-Conforming Goods FOB Los Angeles for Shipment to China Means Injury Arose Domestically When Purchaser Took Title —Other Relevant Factors Include That The Non-Conforming Goods Were Sourced and Made in the U.S. and The Racketeering Activity (Mail/Wire Fraud) Occurred in, and Was Directed from, the United States — Irrelevant to Domestic Injury Inquiry Whether Property Is Tangible or Intangible — 7th Circuit’s “Injury-Felt” Test of Domestic Injury Rejected by Supreme Court — RICO Standing Requires Concrete Financial Loss, Not Merely Injury to Valuable Intangible Property Interest (9th Circuit)

RICO Causation: Parents of Children with Disabilities Deprived In-Person Education and Services during the Pandemic Were Not Causally Injured by Teachers’ False Assurances to Federal Authorities That IDEA-Complaint Policies Were in Place, Which Caused Funds to Issue But Not to the Benefit of the Disabled Children — Damages Too Indirect — Proper Plaintiff Is U.S. Government — Private Injunctive Relief Under RICO Uncertain in Third Circuit

Sanctions: Rule 37(b)(2) Dismissal — Sixth Circuit Factors

Inherent Power Sanctions — Extrajudicial Misconduct: Sanctions Power Extends to Conduct Intended to Sabotage Court’s Ability to Adjudicate the Case Before It, Here, By Commencing State Court Actions Seeking to Enjoin the Federal Plaintiffs from Proceeding with Their Federal Litigation — Sanctions Fee Awards: The Factors Used For Calculating A Fee Award To A Prevailing Party Do Not Govern — Under Goodyear, the Relevant Inquiry Is Whether There Is A Sufficient Causal Link Between The Sanctioned Misconduct And The Fees Awarded

Archives
New York Attorneys JHA handles range the gamut of complex financial and commercial litigation and arbitration, including securities, RICO, corporate and contract disputes, credit default swaps, derivatives, and class, mass, and derivative actions. The firm also represents law firms in major disputes.
New York Attorneys JHA handles range the gamut of complex financial and commercial litigation and arbitration, including securities, RICO, corporate and contract disputes, credit default swaps, derivatives, and class, mass, and derivative actions. The firm also represents law firms in major disputes.

New York Office

© 2024 Joseph Hage Aaronson LLC  
Disclaimer | Attorney Advertising Notice | Legal Notice