Young v. Astrue

300 F. App'x 116
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit
DecidedNovember 25, 2008
DocketNo. 07-1638-cv.
StatusPublished

This text of 300 F. App'x 116 (Young v. Astrue) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Young v. Astrue, 300 F. App'x 116 (2d Cir. 2008).

Opinion

SUMMARY ORDER

Plaintiff-Appellant Nathaniel Young appeals the District Court’s denial of his petition for Social Security benefits. The ALJ disregarded the only medical opinion that directly described Plaintiffs residual functional capacity and then found Plaintiff able to do light work. The ALJ, however, did not state what he found Plaintiffs functional capacity to be. The ALJ was required to state those findings specifically. See Ferraris v. Heckler, 728 F.2d 582, 586 (2d Cir.1984). We therefore vacate and remand so that the ALJ can make the necessary findings as to Plaintiffs residual functional abilities.

We have considered all of Plaintiff-Appellant’s arguments. Accordingly, the judgment of the District Court is VACATED and REMANDED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Ferraris v. Heckler
728 F.2d 582 (Second Circuit, 1984)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
300 F. App'x 116, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/young-v-astrue-ca2-2008.