Milner v. Commissioner of Social Security
| Ceresse Milner |
| Commissioner of Social Security |
| Social Security Administration |
| 3:2018cv01276 |
| August 1, 2018 |
| US District Court for the District of Connecticut |
| New Haven Office |
| Hartford |
| Janet C Hall |
| Sarah A L Merriam |
| Stefan R Underhill |
| Social Security: SSID Tit. XVI |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 405 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 3, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 16 Second CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Commissioner of Social Security re #12 Notice of Appearance (Rothstein, Elizabeth) |
Filing 15
ELECTRONIC FILING ORDER FOR COUNSEL - PLEASE ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH COURTESY COPY REQUIREMENTS IN THIS ORDER Signed by Judge Stefan R. Underhill on 9/6/2018.(Jaiman, R.)
|
|
Filing 14
ORDER OF TRANSFER. Absent consent to a Magistrate Judge, the case is reassigned to District Judge Stefan R. Underhill for all further proceedings. Signed by Clerk on 9/5/2018.(Anastasio, F.)
|
|
Filing 13
REMINDER: Standing Order on Social Security Appeals Signed by Judge Janet C. Hall on 8/14/2018. (Attachments: #1 Consent Form)(Anastasio, F.)
|
| Filing 12 NOTICE of Appearance by Elizabeth Rothstein on behalf of Commissioner of Social Security (Rothstein, Elizabeth) |
| Filing 11 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Ceresse Milner. Commissioner of Social Security served on 8/6/2018, answer due 10/5/2018. Service made by Clerk via email. (Anastasio, F.) |
| Filing 10 ELECTRONIC SUMMONS ISSUED in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 and LR 4 as to *Commissioner of Social Security* with answer to complaint due within *60* days. *Ceresse Milner* *40 Burns Ave.* *Enfield, CT 06082*. (Anastasio, F.) |
|
Filing 9
ORDER granting #2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. Plaintiff has filed a motion seeking to proceed without payment of fees and costs, along with a financial affidavit. See Doc. #2 . Plaintiff asserts that she is unable to afford to pay fees and costs. See id. at 2. Plaintiff states that she is paid $183.16 bi-weekly. See id. at 3. Plaintiff states that she has $509 in monthly obligations. See Id. at 4-5. These allegations are sufficient, at this stage, to establish that plaintiff "is unable to pay" the ordinary filing fees required by the Court. 28 U.S.C. 1915(a)(1). Accordingly, plaintiffs motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is GRANTED. It is so ordered. Signed by Judge Sarah A. L. Merriam on 8/3/18. (Tepe, Jonathan)
|
| Filing 8 Notice to Self-represented Parties Signed by Clerk on 8/3/2018.(Anastasio, F.) |
| Filing 7 Notice re: Statistical Information Signed by Clerk on 8/1/2018.(Anastasio, F.) |
|
Filing 6
ELECTRONIC FILING ORDER FOR COUNSEL - PLEASE ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH COURTESY COPY REQUIREMENTS IN THIS ORDER Signed by Judge Janet C. Hall on 8/1/2018.(Anastasio, F.)
|
|
Filing 5
Standing Scheduling Order Signed by Judge Janet C. Hall on 8/1/2018.(Anastasio, F.)
|
|
Filing 4
Standing Order on Social Security Appeals Signed by Judge Janet C. Hall on 8/1/2018. (Attachments: #1 Consent Form)(Anastasio, F.)
|
| Filing 3 Appearance Self Represented Party by Ceresse Milner (Anastasio, F.) |
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Ceresse Milner. Motions referred to Sarah A. L. Merriam(Anastasio, F.) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Commissioner of Social Security, filed by Ceresse Milner. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit)(Anastasio, F.) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Connecticut District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
