Cases

Brennan, Circuit Judge. *1149 A mother contests the decision that her minor son (whom we refer to as L.D.R.) did not qualify for social security disability benefits until second grade. She also seeks retroactive payments for the first year of L.D.R.'s life, before she applied for assistan

MEMORANDUM ** Plaintiff John C. Wagner appeals the district court’s order affirming a denial of disability benefits under the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 401-434. Although we might have come to a different conclusion were we weighing the evidence in the first instance, substantial evidence supports the administrative law judge’s (“ALJ”) decision. We therefore affirm. 1. The ALJ did n

MEMORANDUM-DECISION and ORDER GLENN T. SUDDABY, District Judge. Currently before the Court, in this action seeking Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”), filed by Milton H. Popick (“Plaintiff’) against the Commissioner of Social Security Commissioner (“Defendant”) under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) and 1383(c)(3), are the following: (1) Defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings (Dkt. No. 18); (2) P

ORDER SCULLIN, Senior District Judge. Plaintiff commenced this action on November 23, 2009, seeking judicial review of Defendant’s final decision denying him supplement security income benefits and .disability insurance benefits under the Social Security Act. See Dkt. No. 1. Defendant filed an answer on March 8, 2010. See Dkt. No. 8. Plaintiff filed a supporting brief on March 22, 2010,

ORDER NORMAN A. MORDUE, District Judge. The above matter comes to me following a ReporUReeommendation by Magistrate Judge Victor E. Bianehini, duly filed on the 29th day of February 2012. Following fourteen (14) days from the service thereof, the Clerk has sent me the file, including any and all objections filed by the parties herein. After careful review of all of the papers h

MEMORANDUM * Michael E. Wagner appeals the district court’s summary judgment order affirming the denial by the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration of Wagner’s request for disability insurance benefits under Title II and supplemental security income benefits under Title XVI of the Social Security Act. The parties are familiar with the facts and procedural history of this case, so we do not repe

PER CURIAM: We VACATE our earlier opinion in this matter, published at 173 F.3d 814, and substitute in its place the following, thus granting the government’s motion for clarification. Stephen A. Kelley, Jr. appeals the district court’s order affirming the Commissioner of Social Security’s (“Commissioner”) denial of his applicatio

628 F.3d 269 (2010) Cathy D. FERGUSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant-Appellee. No. 09-4387. United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit. Argued: December 9, 2010. Decided and Filed: December 23, 2010. *270 ARGUED: W. David Koeninger, Advocates for Basic Legal Equality, Inc.,

698 F.Supp.2d 335 (2010) Marin CANALES, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant. Case No. 08-CV-5019 (FB)(SMG). United States District Court, E.D. New York. March 26, 2010. *336 Richard P. Morris, Esq., Klein, Wagner & Morris, on the brief Christopher J. Bowes, Esq., New York, NY, for the Plaintiff. Be

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD 2023 MSPB 20 Docket No. CB-7521-17-0023-T-1 Social Security Administration, Petitioner, v. Michael L. Levinson, Respondent.

MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER NORMAN A. MORDUE, Senior District Judge. Plaintiff applied for Supplemental'Security Income on behalf of her son, D.M.S., a *384minor child, alleging disability due to attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (“ADHD”), oppositional defiant disorder (“ODD”), and a learning disorder. Plaintiff requested a hearing before

OPINION TROTT, Circuit Judge: OVERVIEW Carlos Gutierrez filed claims for supplemental security income (“SSI”). The Commissioner denied the claims by initial determination, and Gutierrez requested a de novo hearing by an Administrative Law *521 Judge

114 F.3d 1199 97 CJ C.A.R. 889 NOTICE: Although citation of unpublished opinions remains unfavored, unpublished opinions may now be cited if the opinion has persuasive value on a material issue, and a copy is attached to the citing document or, if cited in oral argument, copies are furnished to the Court and all parties. See General Order of November 29, 1993, suspending 10th Cir. Rule 36.3 until December 31, 1995,

794 F.Supp.2d 1025 (2011) Michelle Lee KLIBER, Plaintiff, v. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, and Secretary of Social Security, Defendants. Civ. No. 10-2513 (JJK). United States District Court, D. Minnesota. June 28, 2011. *1028 Michelle Lee Kliber, Elk River, MN, pro se Plaintiff. Lonnie F. Bryan, Esq., Assistant United St

734 F.Supp.2d 773 (2010) Corliss Larsen BAUER, Plaintiff, v. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Defendant. Civil No. 08-6088 (RHK/RLE). United States District Court, D. Minnesota. August 24, 2010. *776 Corliss Larsen Bauer, Lino Lakes, MN, pro se. Lonnie F. Bryan, United States Attorney's Office, Minneapolis, MN, for Defendan

WATTS, J. This case arises from the circumstance that a father and daughter were parties to a multiple-party bank account, and, without the father’s permission, the daughter removed funds from the account to use for her own benefit, allegedly pursuant to Md.Code Ann., Fin. Inst. (1980, 2011 RepLVol.) (“FI”) l^lMffi.

ACCEPTED 01-15-00774-CV FIRST COURT OF APPEALS HOUSTON, TEXAS 9/8/2015 6:53:36

(2008) Mary J. RATHE, Plaintiff, v. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRTION, Michael J. Astrue, Commissioner, Defendant. No. 4:08CV3011. United States District Court, D. Nebraska. October 29, 2008. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER RICHARD G. KOPF, District Judge. Everyone agrees that Mary J. Rathe (Rathe), who is now 58 years old, has a serious problem with her ba

MEMORANDUM MATTHEW W. BRANN, District Judge. 1. BACKGROUND: This case presents a question about the constitutionality of a search and seizure in a college dormitory environment. The primary issue presented cannot be decided by the Court at the motion to dismiss stage of the proceedings, and, consequently, several of the claims will proceed to discovery. II. DISCUSSI

WRIGHT, J. Appellant, Jacqueline Wagner (“Wagner”), appeals her conviction in the Circuit Court for Baltimore County for theft and embezzlement for taking money from a joint bank account on which she was named a joint owner with her father. On February 14, 2013, Wagner was charged by information with theft of more than $500.00 and f