U.S. District Court, Northern District of New York Case Summaries:

Daily Record (Rochester, NY), Aug 29, 2008

U.S. District Court, Northern District of New York Case

Social Security

Pennay v. Astrue

05-CV-673

Judge Scullin

Background: The plaintiff filed an application for disability benefits in 2004. Prior to January 2004, he was a maintenance employee at Fairview Recovery Services, a substance abuse recovery facility. At about the same time, the plaintiff voluntarily quit the position after a confrontation with his supervisor concerning the plaintiff's belief that he gradually was being replaced. The plaintiff has a documented history of alcohol abuse and psychological difficulties although he has abstained from alcohol use since 1995. Reports show the plaintiff has been diagnosed as suffering from generalized anxiety disorder, subclinical post- traumatic stress disorder, bipolar disorder and anger management issues. He is able to able to run errands, do household chores, drive, fish and play golf. The plaintiff brought suit challenging the findings of the ALJ, who found the plaintiff was not disabled under the regulations. The plaintiff argues the level of severity of his impairments is evidenced by his continuous need to take medication to treat his conditions.

Ruling: To be considered disabled, a plaintiff seeking disability insurance benefits must establish that he is unable to engage in any substantial gainful activity by reason of any medically determinable physical or mental impairment, which can be expected to result in death or which has lasted or may be expected to last for a continuous period of not less than 12 months. The court finds the "evidence that medication provides the plaintiff with relief from the severity of his mental condition can, and in this case does, provide substantial evidence to support the ALJ's finding that [the] plaintiff is not disabled."

Eugene D. Faughnan of Hinman, Howard & Kattell LLP for the plaintiff, and William H. Pease, U.S. Attorney's Office, for the defendant

Prisoner Rights

Eighth Amendment

Johnson v. Smith

03-CV-1050

Judge Strom

Background: In the claim, under [section]1983 of the Civil Rights Act of 1871, an Aug. 18 trial resulted, at the close of all the evidence, in both parties resting and moving for judgment as a matter of law. The defendant is the superintendent of the Shawangunk Correctional Facility and learned in 2002 that there were defects in the gym floor where bubbles formed in the vinyl overlay to the cement base. During the same time period, Smith also learned that, prior to his appointment as superintendent, funding had been requested from the DOCS Office of Facilities Planning to replace the entire gym floor. The plaintiff was injured in 2003 while playing basketball on the floor. At issue is whether Smith violated Johnson's Eighth Amendment rights.

Ruling: Among its factual findings, the court finds Smith knew of and disregarded the bubbling condition in the basketball court, believing it to be no more dangerous than public playgrounds. The court also finds the bubbling condition in the floor presented a substantial risk of harm; however, the plaintiff failed to prove the defendant subjectively perceived a substantial risk and disregarded it. The defendant enjoys qualified immunity, therefore the complaint is dismissed.

Bernard Johnson, pro se, and David Fruchter, New York State Attorney General's Office, for the defendant