Cases 1 - 10 of 578
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv02654
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)
BENNETT v. O'MALLEY
as 1:2024cv02648
Plaintiff:
ERIC BENNETT
Defendant:
MARTIN J. O'MALLEY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
OBERTING v. O'MALLEY
as 1:2024cv02490
Defendant:
MARTIN J. O'MALLEY
Plaintiff:
DAVID OBERTING
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
WALKER v. O'MALLEY
as 1:2024cv02491
Defendant:
MARTIN J. O'MALLEY
Plaintiff:
AUDRIENNE WALKER
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
Ponte v. FDIC et al
as 1:2024cv02379
Plaintiff:
Mr. John c Ponte
Defendant:
JONATHAN MCKERNAN, MARTIN J. GRUENBERG, Michael J Hsu and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1343 Violation of Civil Rights
DENNISON, SR. v. O'MALLEY
as 1:2024cv02301
Interested Party:
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
Plaintiff:
FITZGERALD DENNISON, SR.
Defendant:
MARTIN J. O'MALLEY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
ADVOCATE ILLINOIS MASONIC MEDICAL CENTER et al v. BECERRA
as 1:2024cv02064
Plaintiff:
BRONXCARE DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. HEALTH CENTER, ASCENSION MACOMB-OAKLAND HOSPITAL, WARREN CAMPUS, COOPER UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL and others
Defendant:
XAVIER BECERRA
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1395 HHS: Adverse Reimbursement Review
JONES v. O'MALLEY
as 1:2024cv02088
Defendant:
MARTIN O'MALLEY
Plaintiff:
NICOLE JONES
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 205 Denial Social Security Benefits
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv01822
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 0706 Judicial Review of Agency Actions
SIMMS v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY
as 1:2024cv01605
Interested Party:
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
Defendant:
MARTIN O'MALLEY
Plaintiff:
ANGELA D. SIMMS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 205 Denial Social Security Benefits
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.
