Hughes v. Commissioner of Social Security
Plaintiff: Matthew Hughes
Defendant: Commissioner of Social Security
Case Number: 6:2024cv01030
Filed: August 21, 2024
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of New York
Presiding Judge: Therese Wiley Dancks
Nature of Suit: Social Security: DIWC/DIWW
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on September 9, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
September 9, 2024 Filing 8 NOTICE OF SUBSEQUENT ATTORNEY APPEARANCE - COMMISSIONER : Shannon Fishel appearing for Commissioner of Social Security as SUBSTITUTED COUNSEL FOR Rebecca Estelle. (Fishel, Shannon)
September 9, 2024 Filing 7 NOTICE OF INITIAL ATTORNEY APPEARANCE - COMMISSIONER: Rebecca Estelle appearing for Commissioner of Social Security. Social Security Administrative Transcript due by 12/9/2024. (Estelle, Rebecca)
August 21, 2024 Opinion or Order Filing 6 TEXT ORDER granting #3 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis of Matthew Hughes: The Court having considered Plaintiff's application to proceed without prepayment of fees under 28 U.S.C. 1915 it is hereby ORDERED, that the application is GRANTED. **Plaintiff should note that, although the application to proceed in forma pauperis has been granted, Plaintiff will still be required to pay fees that Plaintiff incurs in this action, including copying and/or witness fees. SO ORDERED by Magistrate Judge Therese Wiley Dancks on 8/21/2024. (sg)
August 21, 2024 Opinion or Order Filing 5 General Order #18 Issued. (kck)
August 21, 2024 Filing 4 SOCIAL SECURITY CONSENT / DECLINATION FORM filed by Matthew Hughes advising of consent to Jurisdiction by US Magistrate Judge. (kck)
August 21, 2024 Filing 3 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by Matthew Hughes. (kck)
August 21, 2024 Filing 2 Social Security Identification Form [LODGED] [Pursuant to General Order #18, this document has been electronically lodged with the Court. Viewable by case participants and court personnel only, it is not a filed document, therefore is not available for public inspection. Any further distribution or dissemination is prohibited]. (kck)
August 21, 2024 Filing 1 COMPLAINT - Social Security Appeal. [Pursuant to General Order #18, Section B(3), the CM/ECF system will generate a Notice of Electronic Filing to the USAO-NDNY and Regional Counsel for the Social Security Administration. Service of a Complaint along with the Social Security Identification Form will be considered complete only when the three steps in paragraph 2(A), 2(B) and 2(C) of General Order #18 have been completed.]. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit - Supplement Fee Agreement, #2 Exhibit - Appellate Division Decision AC Denial, #3 Civil Cover Sheet) (kck)

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 New York Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Hughes v. Commissioner of Social Security
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Matthew Hughes
Represented By: Peter W. Antonowicz
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Commissioner of Social Security
Represented By: Shannon Fishel
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.


Why Is My Information Online?