Bock v. O'Malley
| Bridget A. Bock |
| Martin J. O'Malley |
| 5:2024cv05066 |
| August 21, 2024 |
| US District Court for the District of South Dakota |
| Daneta Wollmann |
| Social Security: SSID Title XVI |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID) |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 16, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 7 Notice of Withdrawal and Substitution of Attorney as to Martin J. O'Malley. Attorney Michaele Sanders Hofmann added. Attorney Civil United States Attorney terminated. (Hofmann, Michaele) |
| PRO HAC VICE fee paid by Plaintiff. Fee Amount: $200.00, Receipt No.: #400003908. (DJP) |
Filing 6
ORDER granting #4 Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice of.. Signed by US Magistrate Judge Daneta Wollmann on 9/13/2024. (SC)
|
| NOTICE of Filing Error: #5 Order on Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice was filed in error and should be disregarded. (SC) |
| Filing 5 (FILED IN ERROR) ORDER granting #4 Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice of.. Signed by US Magistrate Judge Daneta Wollmann on 9/12/2024. (SC) Modified on 9/13/2024 (SC). |
| Filing 4 MOTION for Attorney David B. Goetz to be Admitted Pro Hac Vice (includes a request to waive the fee) by Bridget A. Bock. (Julius, Margo) Modified on 9/13/2024 (SC). |
|
Filing 3
ORDER granting #2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis.. Signed by US Magistrate Judge Daneta Wollmann on 9/10/2024. (SC)
|
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Bridget A. Bock. (DJP) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE TO PARTIES: This case is directly assigned to a magistrate judge pursuant to Local Rule 83.9. On or before the date on which the answer must be filed, each party must submit a completed Social Security Case Assignment Form, through which the party either (1) consents to disposition of the case by the magistrate judge under 28 U.S.C. 636(c) or (2) asks to have a district judge assigned to the case.Click the links below: # Local Rule 83.9: https://www.sdd.uscourts.gov/LocalRulesCivil # Social Security Assignment Form: https://www.sdd.uscourts.gov/forms/social-security-case-assignment-formCOMPLAINT on Social Security Appeal filed in shell case on 8-21-2024 filed by Bridget A. Bock. Certified Copy of Administrative Record due by 10/21/2024. (DJP) (Main Document 1 replaced to include case number and regenerated to all counsel on 8/21/2024) (DJP). |
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 South Dakota 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
| Search for this case: Bock v. O'Malley | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: Martin J. O'Malley | |
| Represented By: | Office of General Counsel - Dallas |
| Represented By: | Michaele Sanders Hofmann |
| 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 ] |
| Plaintiff: Bridget A. Bock | |
| Represented By: | Margo Tschetter Julius |
| Represented By: | David B. Goetz |
| Represented By: | David B. Goetz |
| 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.
