Cases 1 - 10 of 943
Hoglund v. Indiana State of et al
as 3:2017cv00824
Plaintiff:
Keith Hoglund
Defendant:
Indiana State of, Edgar D Whitcomb, Mitch Daniels and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
WARFIELD v. ASTRUE
as 1:2013cv01019
Defendant:
MICHAEL ASTRUE
Miscellaneou:
SSA (Court Use Only)
Plaintiff:
JOHN WARFIELD
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
FAIRFIELD v. ASTRUE
as 1:2013cv00932
Defendant:
MICHAEL ASTRUE
Plaintiff:
DIANE FAIRFIELD
Miscellaneou:
SSA (Court Use Only)
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 205 Denial Social Security Benefits
HOOD v. ASTRUE
as 1:2013cv00270
Defendant:
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE
Plaintiff:
JIMMY L. HOOD, JR.
Miscellaneou:
SSA (Court Use Only)
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
THOMAS v. ASTRUE
as 2:2013cv00048
Defendant:
MICHAEL ASTRUE
Miscellaneou:
SSA (Court Use Only)
Plaintiff:
DELANA L. THOMAS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
SCHADENFROH v. ASTRUE
as 1:2013cv00223
Defendant:
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE
Plaintiff:
LINDA L. SCHADENFROH
Miscellaneou:
SSA (Court Use Only)
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
FARLEY v. ASTRUE
as 1:2013cv00167
Defendant:
MICHAEL ASTRUE
Plaintiff:
CHERYL A. FARLEY
Miscellaneou:
SSA (Court Use Only)
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
MOISTNER v. ASTRUE
as 1:2013cv00166
Defendant:
MICHAEL ASTRUE
Plaintiff:
BARBARA D. MOISTNER
Miscellaneou:
SSA (Court Use Only)
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
TAYLOR v. ASTRUE
as 1:2013cv00162
Defendant:
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE
Miscellaneou:
SSA (Court Use Only)
Plaintiff:
BETTY A. TAYLOR
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 402 Social Security Benefits
LONG v. ASTRUE
as 1:2013cv00161
Defendant:
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE
Plaintiff:
RICKY DALE LONG
Miscellaneou:
SSA (Court Use Only)
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
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.
