⚖ SoapBox law
CasesDocketsStatutesRegulationsJudgesLawyersFile a complaintOversightDataLibrary

Cases

Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.

20 opinions for “Chaney v. Commissioner of Social Security”

District Court, S.D. Florida · 2012-03-06 · Published · cited 14× · 839 F. Supp. 2d 1291; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 39546; 2012 WL 928184
ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION KATHLEEN M. WILLIAMS, District Judge. This MATTER is before the Court on Magistrate Judge Barry S. Seltzer’s Report and Recommendation [D.E. 24], More than fourteen days have passed since Magistrate Judge Seltzer issued his Report and Recommendation, and no objections have been filed. Moreover, the Court has conducted a de novo review of the
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2016-02-03 · Published · cited 193× · 812 F.3d 672; 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 1775; 2016 WL 404058
BYE, Circuit Judge. Travis Chaney appeals the district court’s 1 affirmance of the Social Security Commissioner’s decision to deny disability benefits and supplemental security income under Titles II and XVI of the Social Security Act. We affirm. I Chaney filed an applic
District Court, C.D. California · 2000-06-02 · Published · cited 73× · 99 F. Supp. 2d 1212; 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10511; 2000 WL 760992
99 F.Supp.2d 1212 (2000) Sula Ann PATTERSON for Mike W. Chaney (deceased) Plaintiff, v. Kenneth APFEL, Commissioner of Social Security Administration, Defendant. No. CV 99-5033 AJW. United States District Court, C.D. California, Western Division. June 2, 2000. James Patrick Shea, Susan R. Wasserman Law Offices, Los Angeles, CA, for plaintiff. Lawrence E. Kole
California Court of Appeal · 2018-03-08 · Published · cited 0×
Filed 3/8/18 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION SIX MICHAEL CHANEY, 2d Civil No.B282120 (Super. Ct. No. 15FL-0528) Plaintiff and Respondent, (San Luis Obispo County) v. LEANNE NETTERSTROM, Defendant and Appellant. After three years of dating and cohabitation, appellan
District Court, E.D. Texas · 2001-09-17 · Published · cited 0× · 168 F. Supp. 2d 628; 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22531; 2001 WL 1240847
168 F.Supp.2d 628 (2001) Stella M. EARP, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION. No. 4:00CV328. United States District Court, E.D. Texas, Sherman Division. September 17, 2001. *629 James Michael Sloan, Law Offices of Michael Sloan, McKinney, TX, for plaintiff. Steven MacArthur Mason, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S
District Court, N.D. New York · 1996-10-25 · Published · cited 7× · 969 F. Supp. 822; 1996 WL 904744
969 F.Supp. 822 (1996) Rita SCHAAL, SS # XXX-XX-XXXX, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,[1] Defendant. No. 93-CV-1618. United States District Court, N.D. New York. June 10, 1996. Memorandum Denying Motion to Vacate October 25, 1996. *823 *824
District Court, District of Columbia · 2025-11-05 · Published · cited 0×
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA PHILLIP WALTER SIMON, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. 25 - 3452 (LLA) SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff Phillip Walter Simon, proceeding pro se, brings this action against
Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2004-07-16 · Published · cited 7× · 854 A.2d 233; 158 Md. App. 1; 2004 Md. App. LEXIS 109
854 A.2d 233 (2004) 158 Md.App. 1 CHANEY ENTERPRISES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP v. Bernard R. WINDSOR, Jr., et al. No. 00715, Sept. Term, 2003. Court of Special Appeals of Maryland. July 16, 2004. *234 Steven T. Cain (Cain & Wyrough, PC, on the brief), Marlboro, for Appellant. David E. Grover, Rockvill
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2025-03-14 · Published · cited 0×
USCA11 Case: 21-12314 Document: 131-1 Date Filed: 03/14/2025 Page: 1 of 169 [PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 21-12314 ____________________ NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIAT
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000-08-02 · Published · cited 14× · 223 F.3d 937; 2000 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6417; 2000 Daily Journal DAR 8541; 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 18350; 2000 WL 1056077
Opinion by Judge O’SCANNLAIN; Dissent by Judge REINHARDT. O’SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judge: We must decide what discretion the Commissioner of Social Security possesses to make adjustments in Supplemental Security Income benefits based on changes in a recipient’s monthly income. I The Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”) program, provided for at 42 U.S.C. § 1381 et seq.,
District Court, C.D. California · 2009-12-15 · Published · cited 2× · 685 F. Supp. 2d 1076; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 125410; 2009 WL 5852560
685 F.Supp.2d 1076 (2009) Sakil SHEIKH and Saaedahmed Rasheed Sheikh, Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY; U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Defendants. No. CV 09-5330 SVW (RCx). United States District Court, C.D. California. December 15, 2009. *1077 Wade J. Chernick, Wade J. Chernick Law Offices
District Court, D. Connecticut · 2003-02-20 · Published · cited 8× · 242 F. Supp. 2d 127; 2003 WL 21011133; 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7381
242 F.Supp.2d 127 (2002) CONNECTICUT STATE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, et al. v. Tommy THOMPSON No. CIV.A.3:99 CV 2020 S. United States District Court, D. Connecticut. September 9, 2002. Order Implementing Ruling January 3, 2003. Order Denying Partial Reconsideration February 20, 2003. *130 Ri
Appellate Court of Illinois · 1979-08-02 · Published · cited 1× · 393 N.E.2d 75; 74 Ill. App. 3d 424; 30 Ill. Dec. 420; 1979 Ill. App. LEXIS 2758
Mr. JUSTICE CRAVEN delivered the opinion of the court: The plaintiffs, Forrest Chaney and David Imber, were discharged from their jobs as agents for the Illinois Bureau of Investigation (IBI) based on a charge of insubordination for failing to obey an order of the superintendent. Following hearings on the discharge
Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel · 2014-11-19 · Published · cited 0×
The Department of Homeland Security’s Authority to Prioritize Removal of Certain Aliens Unlawfully Present in the United States and to Defer Removal of Others The Department of Homeland Security’s proposed policy to prioritize the removal of certain aliens unlawfully present in the United States would be a permissible exercise of DHS’s discretion to enforce the immigration laws. The Department of Homeland Security’s proposed deferred action program for parents of U.S. ci
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1984-01-17 · Published · cited 27× · 718 F.2d 1174; 231 U.S. App. D.C. 136
J. SKELLY WRIGHT, Circuit Judge: In the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA), 21 U.S.C. § 301 et seq. (1976 & Supp. V 1981), Congress has required the Secretary of Health and Human Services or her delegate, the Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA),1 to assure that all “new drugs” are “safe and effective” for use under the conditions prescribed, recommended, or sugg
District Court, E.D. Texas · 1995-12-26 · Published · cited 0× · 914 F. Supp. 1432; 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20172; 1995 WL 804591
ORDER HANNAH, District Judge. CAME ON FOR CONSIDERATION the above-styled and numbered civil action, the court having heretofore ordered that this matter be referred to the Honorable Earl S. Hines, United States Magistrate Judge at Beaumont, Texas, for proper consideration pursuant to applicable laws and orders of this court; and the court having received and considered the Report of the United
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2018-11-08 · Published · cited 79× · 908 F.3d 476
Concurrence by Judge Owens WARDLAW, Circuit Judge: *485It is no hyperbole to say that Dulce Garcia embodies the American dream. Born into poverty, Garcia and her parents shared a San Diego house with other families to save money on rent; she was even homeless for a time as a child. But she studied hard and excelled academical
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2022-10-05 · Published · cited 35× · 50 F.4th 498
Case: 21-40680 Document: 00516498357 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/05/2022 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED October 5, 2022 N