Cases 1 - 10 of 64
James Ford, Jr. v. Michael Astrue, et al
as 11-5235
Plaintiff - Appellant:
James A. Ford, Jr.
Defendant - Appellee:
Michael J. Astrue, Commissioner of Social Security, Linda S. Mcmahon, Deputy Commissioner of Operations Social Security Administration and Carolyn L. Simmons, Associate Commissioner for Central Operations Social Security Administration
FORD v. ASTRUE et al
as 1:2009cv01243
Plaintiff:
JAMES A. FORD, jR.
Defendant:
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, LINDA S. MCMAHON and CAROLYN L. SIMMONS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal
Ledford v. McMahon
as 4:2008cv00143
Plaintiff:
Daniel Lee Ledford
Defendant:
Linda S. McMahon
Cause Of Action: U.S. Government Defendant
Bonham v. U.S. Department of H & HS et al
as 1:2008cv01609
Plaintiff:
James W. Bonham
Defendant:
U.S. Department of H & HS, Michael O. Leavitt and Linda S. McMahon
Cause Of Action: U.S. Government Defendant
Marshall v. Astrue
as 08-1189
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ROGER MARSHALL
Defendant - Appellee:
LINDA S. MCMAHON, Acting Commissioner of Social Security and MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security
Hadzic v. McMahon
as 1:2007cv00534
Plaintiff:
Sulejman Hadzic
Defendant:
Linda S McMahon
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWW)
HUTCHINS v. MCMAHON
as 1:2007cv01083
Plaintiff:
WENDELL HUTCHINS
Defendant:
LINDA S. MCMAHON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
Wilkinson v. McMahon
as 1:2007cv00301
Plaintiff:
Nathan Wilkinson
Defendant:
Linda S McMahon
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 7422 Appeal from Administrative Decision
Pinson v. McMahon
as 3:2007cv01056
Plaintiff:
Cheryl Pinson
Defendant:
Linda S McMahon
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
Woodley v. McMahon
as 6:2007cv00985
Plaintiff:
Terrell J Woodley
Defendant:
Linda S McMahon
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
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.
