Hess v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner of
| Jordan Hess |
| Social Security Administration, Commissioner of |
| Social Security Administration - Office of General Counsel |
| 2:2025cv02119 |
| March 13, 2025 |
| U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas |
| John W Lungstrum |
| Social Security: DIWC/DIWW |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC) |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 13, 2025. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 3 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis NOTE - Access to document is restricted pursuant to the courts privacy policy. by Plaintiff Jordan Michael Hess (Attachments: #1 Affidavit)(Sciolaro, Kyle) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET by Plaintiff Jordan Michael Hess. (Sciolaro, Kyle) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT - SOCIAL SECURITY with trial location of Kansas City. Pursuant to Rule 3 of the Fed. R. Civ. P. Supplemental Rules for Social Security Actions, the Notice of Electronic Filing for this Complaint has been transmitted to the U.S. Attorney for the District of Kansas, as well as the Social Security Administration Office of General Counsel, filed by Jordan Michael Hess.(Sciolaro, Kyle) |
| NOTICE OF JUDGE ASSIGNMENT: Case assigned to District Judge John W. Lungstrum for all proceedings. (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no.pdf document associated with this entry.) (jk) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Kansas 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.
