Zeoli v. Social Security Administration

E.D. Arkansas

Zeoli v. Social Security Administration

DecidedJune 21, 2023

Docket4:22-cv-00848

StatusUnknown

This text of Zeoli v. Social Security Administration (Zeoli v. Social Security Administration) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Arkansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Zeoli v. Social Security Administration, (E.D. Ark. 2023).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS CENTRAL DIVISION

GERALD ZEOLI PLAINTIFF

v. Case No. 4:22-cv-00848-JTK

KILOLO KIJAKAZI, DEFENDANT Acting Commissioner Social Security ORDER Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion for Jury Trial. (Doc. No. 12) In his motion, Plaintiff argues that he is entitled to a constitutional right to jury trial under Rule 39(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Defendant argues in its response that the exclusive basis for this Court’s jurisdiction in this case is 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), which states that social security cases are decided “on the pleadings and transcript of the record.” Additionally, Defendant cites as support an Eighth Circuit appeal that affirmed the district court’s denial of a social security plaintiff’s motion for jury trial. See Ginter v. Sec’y of the Dept. of Health, Education & Welfare, 621 F.2d 313, 314 (8th Cir. 1980). The motion is denied. As stated in Ginter, this Court has a “limited role” under section 205(g) of the Social Security Act, which is “limited to reviewing the administrative record to determine whether there is substantial evidence to support the findings of the Secretary.” 621 F.2d at 313. Further, district courts “cannot grant a trial de novo before either the court or a jury.” Id. (citing Richardson v. Perales, 402 U.S. 389 (1971)). SO ORDERED THIS 20th day of June, 2023.

JEROME T. KEARNEY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS CENTRAL DIVISION

GERALD ZEOLI PLAINTIFF

v. Case No. 4:22-cv-00848-JTK

KILOLO KIJAKAZI, DEFENDANT Acting Commissioner Social Security ORDER Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion for Jury Trial. (Doc. No. 12) In his motion, Plaintiff argues that he is entitled to a constitutional right to jury trial under Rule 39(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Defendant argues in its response that the exclusive basis for this Court’s jurisdiction in this case is 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), which states that social security cases are decided “on the pleadings and transcript of the record.” Additionally, Defendant cites as support an Eighth Circuit appeal that affirmed the district court’s denial of a social security plaintiff’s motion for jury trial. See Ginter v. Sec’y of the Dept. of Health, Education & Welfare, 621 F.2d 313, 314 (8th Cir. 1980). The motion is denied. As stated in Ginter, this Court has a “limited role” under section 205(g) of the Social Security Act, which is “limited to reviewing the administrative record to determine whether there is substantial evidence to support the findings of the Secretary.” 621 F.2d at 313. Further, district courts “cannot grant a trial de novo before either the court or a jury.” Id. (citing Richardson v. Perales, 402 U.S. 389 (1971)). SO ORDERED THIS 20th day of June, 2023.

JEROME T. KEARNEY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Zeoli v. Social Security Administration, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/zeoli-v-social-security-administration-ared-2023.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack