Cases 21 - 30 of 52
HAYES v. SEBELIUS
as 2:2013cv02922
Plaintiff:
JEROME A. HAYES
Defendant:
KATHLEEN SEBELIUS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
YOUNKERS v. SEBELIUS
as 2:2013cv02809
Plaintiff:
STEPHANIE J. YOUNKERS
Defendant:
KATHLEEN SEBELIUS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
DIEHL v. SEBELIUS
as 2:2013cv02506
Plaintiff:
GLORIA LYNN DIEHL
Defendant:
KATHLEEN SEBELIUS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWW)
SPONSLER v. SEBELIUS
as 2:2013cv02264
Plaintiff:
RICHARD SPONSLER, JR.
Defendant:
KATHLEEN SEBELIUS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
DOMBROWSKI v. SEBELIUS
as 1:2013cv00092
Plaintiff:
PATRICK C. DOMBROWSKI
Defendant:
KATHLEEN SEBELIUS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1391 Personal Injury
SAINT VINCENT HEALTH CENTER et al v. SEBELIUS
as 1:2013cv00088
Plaintiff:
SAINT VINCENT HEALTH CENTER and MONONGAHELA VALLEY HOSPITAL
Defendant:
KATHLEEN SEBELIUS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1395 HHS: Adverse Reimbursement Review
CONESTOGA WOOD SPECIALITIES CORPORATION et al v. SEBELIUS et al
as 5:2012cv06744
Plaintiff:
CONESTOGA WOOD SPECIALITIES CORPORATION , NORMAN HAHN , NORMAN LEMAR HAHN and others
Defendant:
KATHLEEN SEBELIUS , HILDA SOLIS , TIMOTHY GEITHNER and others
Movant:
THE AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF PENNSYLVANIA and THE AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 bb Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993
McCLISTER v. SEBELIUS et al
as 2:2012cv06557
Plaintiff:
COLLEEN McCLISTER
Defendant:
KATHLEEN SEBELIUS and MICHAEL J. ASTRUE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
GOVENS v. SEBELIUS et al
as 2:2012cv05292
Plaintiff:
DONALD GOVENS
Defendant:
KATHLEEN SEBELIUS and MICHAEL J. ASTRUE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
LYNN v. SEBELIUS
as 2:2012cv01200
Plaintiff:
JANET G. LYNN
Defendant:
KATHLEEN SEBELIUS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
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.
