Summary
The United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts grants Roland Garrett leave to proceed in forma pauperis and addresses his challenge to the termination of Social Security benefits. The court denies a temporary restraining order, keeps the preliminary-injunction request under advisement, orders transmission of the action to the Social Security Administration, and dismisses claims for monetary damages.
Holdings
- The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis was granted.
- A complaint filed by a plaintiff proceeding without prepayment of the filing fee is subject to preliminary screening under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), with a pro se complaint liberally construed.
- The action would not be dismissed at that stage solely because exhaustion and a final SSA decision were unclear; instead, the Clerk was ordered to transmit the complaint and emergency motion to the SSA under Rule 3 of the Supplemental Rules for Social Security Actions.
- Claims for monetary damages arising under the Social Security Act were dismissed because § 405(g) does not provide a damages remedy and § 405(h) makes § 405(g) the exclusive route for claims arising under the Act.
Questions Presented
- Whether Garrett should be permitted to proceed without prepayment of the filing fee.
- Whether the complaint and emergency request should be screened or dismissed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2).
- Whether Garrett's Social Security claim could proceed under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) despite uncertainty regarding exhaustion and the existence of a final agency decision.
- Whether the Social Security Act permits Garrett to recover monetary damages for alleged wrongful termination or mishandling of benefits.
- Whether Garrett was entitled at that stage to a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunctive relief.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (8)
- FDIC v. Meyer, 510 U.S. 471, 475 (1994)(followed)
- United States v. Nordic Village, Inc., 503 U.S. 30, 33-34 (1992)(followed)
- Irwin v. Department of Veterans Affairs, 498 U.S. 95 (1990)(followed)
- Sims v. Apfel, 530 U.S. 103, 106-07 (2000)(followed)
- Schweiker v. Chilicky, 487 U.S. 412, 424-25 (1988)(followed)
- Weinberger v. Salfi, 422 U.S. 749, 756-61 (1975)(followed)
- Toth v. Commissioner of Social Security, 705 F. App'x 138 (3d Cir. 2017) (per curiam)(followed)
- Bowen v. City of New York, 476 U.S. 467, 479-80 (1986)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…