🧪 TEST MODE ACTIVE Use test card: 4242 4242 4242 4242

Daniel J. Stewart

United States District Court for the Northern District of New York magistrate 9 signed orders read

How Judge Stewart decides

Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

What persuades

In Social Security appeals, recommends remand where the ALJ failed to analyze the supportability and consistency of medical opinions, while rejecting the claimant's meritless arguments.

“ORDERS that Plaintiff's motion for judgment on the pleadings, Dkt. No. 11, is GRANTED ... the Commissioner's final decision is REVERSED and REMANDED”

Treats administrative exhaustion as a fact-sensitive inquiry: a rapid transfer after the incident can create a triable question about whether the grievance process was actually available.

“plaintiff’s filings raised a factual question as to exhaustion, including as to whether ‘the processing and/or the availability of the grievance process’ was available to him under the circumstances presented, i.e., when he was quickly transferred to a new facility within days of the alleged incident.”

In Social Security review, does not require an administrative law judge to expressly discuss every third-party statement when the decision otherwise shows that the evidence was considered.

“the relevant statutes ‘require . . . that the ALJ “consider” third-party statements but do not contain any articulation requirements.’”

Cautions

In prisoner Section 1983 cases, recommends summary judgment for the defendant where the plaintiff fails to establish personal involvement, applying Tangreti's elimination of supervisory-liability shortcuts.

“Defendants' motion for summary judgment is GRANTED; and 3. Plaintiff's operative complaint is DISMISSED.”

Enforces PLRA administrative exhaustion, recommending summary judgment for the defendant on unexhausted failure-to-protect claims.

“ORDERS that Defendants' motion for summary judgment, Dkt. No. 18, is GRANTED; and the Court further ORDERS that the Clerk shall enter judgment in Defendant's favor and close this case”

Limits discovery to the claims that remain in the case and will not compel production based only on speculation that additional documents exist, although he may require a party to describe the search it performed.

“The Court will not order ‘a party to produce that which does not exist,’ particularly where, as here, Plaintiff has not provided any ‘evidence of [D]efendant withholding . . . relevant documents it possesses’ in response to Request for Production No. 3.”

Signed rulings

A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.

United States v. Cline
1:25-cv-01576-GTS-DJS · 2026-04-17
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“the Court accepts and adopts Magistrate Judge Stewart's Report-Recommendation in its entirety and denies Defendants' motions to dismiss, and the Court affirms Magistrate Judge Stewart's Order granting the Government's Application for a Prejudgment Writ of Attachment in the amount of $875,000.00”

Daniel J. S. v. Commissioner of Social Security
5:24-cv-00134-AMN-DJS · 2025-03-06
Motion for judgment on pleadings (plaintiff) Granted

“ORDERS that Plaintiff's motion for judgment on the pleadings, Dkt. No. 11, is GRANTED ... the Commissioner's final decision is REVERSED and REMANDED”

Motion for judgment on pleadings (defendant) Denied

“ORDERS that the Commissioner's motion for judgment on the pleadings, Dkt. No. 15, is DENIED”

Morrow v. Vanderwerff
9:19-cv-00555-DNH-DJS · 2022-02-22
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“Defendants' motion for summary judgment is GRANTED; and 3. Plaintiff's operative complaint is DISMISSED.”

Lancaster v. Coveny
9:19-cv-00583-GTS-DJS · 2024-03-21
Habeas petition (petitioner) Denied

“ORDERED that the Petition (Dkt. No. 1) is DENIED and DISMISSED; and it is further ORDERED that a certificate of appealability not issue”

DeVinney v. Russell
9:24-cv-00572-AMN-DJS · 2025-05-23
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted

“ORDERS that Defendants' motion for summary judgment, Dkt. No. 18, is GRANTED; and the Court further ORDERS that the Clerk shall enter judgment in Defendant's favor and close this case”

Moorer v. Matthie
9:25-cv-00679-AJB-DJS · 2026-05-08
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“Defendants’ motion for summary judgment and partial motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 27) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part; ... Plaintiff’s § 1983 conspiracy claims against defendants Matthie, Rushlow, and Ramie are DISMISSED”

Summary judgment (defendant) Denied

“Defendants’ motion for summary judgment on exhaustion grounds is DENIED”

Guerrero v. Albany Med Health System
1:24-cv-01344-MAD-DJS · 2026-04-27
Motions to compel (plaintiff) Denied

“ORDERED, that Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Discovery (Dkt. No. 61) is DENIED as set forth above”

Dina W. v. Commissioner of Social Security
1:24-cv-01128-DJS · 2026-03-20
Judgment on the pleadings (plaintiff) Denied

“ORDERED, that Plaintiff’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings is DENIED”

Judgment on the pleadings (defendant) Granted

“ORDERED, that Defendant’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings is GRANTED”

Moore v. Maye
9:24-cv-01105-LEK-DJS · 2026-03-13
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“ORDERED, that that the Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. No. 35) is DENIED”

Default judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“ORDERED, that the Motion for a Default Judgment (Dkt. No. 23) is DENIED”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Stewart's sampled civil docket is dominated by Social Security disability appeals, alongside criminal-duty matters involving complaints and applications for tax or search records. The duration figures cover twelve terminated Social Security cases filed in 2020 and measure filing to termination, not the time taken to decide a motion.

Put Judge Stewart's record to work

Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Stewart actually rules, not a generic AI guess.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Stewart's own signed orders and cites them.