Cases 11 - 20 of 24
Robertson v. Colvin
as 1:2013cv01905
Plaintiff:
Douglas J. Robertson
Defendant:
Carolyn W. Colvin
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
Robertson v. Colvin
as 8:2013cv01027
Plaintiff:
Gary C. Robertson, Jr.
Defendant:
Carolyn W. Colvin
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
Lucas v. Astrue
as 7:2012cv00582
Defendant:
Michael Astrue
Plaintiff:
Cynthia Robertson Lucas
Interested Party:
SSA General Counsel
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
Robertson v. Astrue
as 7:2011cv00116
Defendant:
Michael J Astrue
Plaintiff:
Terry L. Robertson
Interested Party:
SSA General Counsel
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
Robertson v. Watkins
as 5:2010cv00117
Plaintiff:
Tabitha Richard Robertson
Interested Party:
SSA General Counsel
Defendant:
Laurie Watkins
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
Robertson-Furry v. Commissioner of Social Security
as 3:2010cv00110
Plaintiff:
Lisa M. Robertson-Furry
Defendant:
Commissioner of Social Security
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
Robertson v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration
as 6:2010cv00597
Defendant:
Commissioner of Social Security Administration
Plaintiff:
Sandra W Robertson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
Robertson v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration
as 0:2009cv02259
Plaintiff:
Joe Robertson
Defendant:
Commissioner of Social Security Administration
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
ROBERTSON v. ASTRUE
as 1:2009cv00243
Plaintiff:
CHARLES D. ROBERTSON
Defendant:
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE
Interested Party:
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
Cause Of Action: U.S. Government Defendant
Robertson v. Astrue
as 5:2009cv00005
Plaintiff:
Donna M. Robertson
Defendant:
Michael J. Astrue
Cause Of Action: U.S. Government Defendant
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.
