Cases

ORDER This is an appeal from a district court judgment affirming a decision to deny an application for Social Security disability benefits. The parties have agreed to waive oral argument and, upon examination, this panel unanimously agrees that oral argument is not needed. Fed. R.App. P. 34(a). On April 3, 1995, Larry Mercer filed an application for disability benefits based on a combination of physical

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA STEPHANIE G., 1 Plaintiff, v. Case No. 22-cv-00904-RMM MARTIN O’MALLEY, 2 Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff Stephanie G. brought this action under a provision of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), seeking review of t

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER ROBERT W. PRATT, District Judge. Plaintiff, Linda Darlene Mercer, filed a Complaint in this Court on December 27, 2013, seeking review of the Commissioner’s decision to deny her claim for Social Security benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 401 et seq. This Court may review a final decision by the Commissioner. 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).

MEMORANDUM * Garry L. Mercer (Mercer) appeals from the district court’s grant of summary judg*626ment in favor of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration (Commissioner), upholding a denial of disability insurance benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 401^434. Because the parties are familiar with the facts,

MEMORANDUM * Garry L. Mercer (Mercer) appeals from the district court’s grant of summary judg*626ment in favor of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration (Commissioner), upholding a denial of disability insurance benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 401^434. Because the parties are familiar with the facts,

SYLLABUS This syllabus is not part of the Court’s opinion. It has been prepared by the Office of the Clerk for the convenience of the reader. It has been neither reviewed nor approved by the Court and may not summarize all portions of the opinion. State v. David L. Smith (A-4-21) (085635) Argued April 26, 2022 -- Decided June 28, 2022 SOLOMON, J., writing for a unanimous Court. N.J.S.A. 39:3-74 prohibits operation of a vehicle

JUDGMENT ROBERT G. JAMES, District Judge. The Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 34] of the Magistrate Judge having been considered, together with Defendant’s Objection [Doc. No. 35], Plaintiffs Response [Doc. No. 36], and Defendant’s Reply [Doc. No. 37,] thereto filed with this Court, and, after a de novo review of the record, finding that the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation is cor

PER CURIAM. This is an appeal from the district court’s decision affirming a decision by an administrative law judge (“ALJ”) in a disability insurance benefits case. The ALJ denied this pro se appellant’s request for a waiver of recovery of an overpayment of benefits. He also concluded that the Commissioner of Social Security had properly recouped the overpayme

129 F.Supp.2d 1226 (2001) Teresa L. MERCER, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF CEDAR RAPIDS and William J. Byrne, Defendants. No. C98-143MWB. United States District Court, N.D. Iowa, Cedar Rapids Division. January 24, 2001. *1227 *1228 *1229 Mark John Seidl, Seidl &

780 So.2d 563 (2001) Jerrod SNEARL and Ellouise Stewart v. Gary T. MERCER, Mercer Construction Services, Bituminous Ins., Co., Succession Representative of the Estate of Benny L. Frank, ABC Ins. Co., and State of Louisiana Through the Department of Transportation and Development Dalton Olinde v. Gary T. Mercer, Mercer Construction Services, Bituminous Ins., Co., Succession Representative of the Estate of Benny L. Frank, ABC Ins., Co.,

104 F.Supp.2d 1130 (2000) Teresa L. MERCER, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF CEDAR RAPIDS and William J. Byrne, Defendant. No. C98-0143-MWB. United States District Court, N.D. Iowa, Cedar Rapids Division. July 19, 2000. *1131 *1132 *1133 Mark J. Seidl, Seidl & Chi

CHARLES S. HAIGHT, JR., Senior United States District Judge I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Joseph Mercer brought the instant civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, against Dora B. Schriro, the Commissioner of his employer, the State of Connecticut Department of Emerg

794 A.2d 278 (2001) 350 N.J. Super. 72 Robert D. PRUNETTI, County Executive of Mercer County, Plaintiff, v. MERCER COUNTY BOARD OF CHOSEN FREEHOLDERS, Defendant. Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division. November 13, 2001. *283 Alfred B. Vuocolo, Jr., Mercer County Counsel, Trenton, for plaintiff the County Executive of

SYLLABUS (This syllabus is not part of the opinion of the Court. It has been prepared by the Office of the Clerk for the convenience of the reader. It has been neither reviewed nor approved by the Supreme Court. Please note that, in the interest of brevity, portions of any opinion may not have been summarized.) L.A. v. D.Y.F.S. (A-55/56-12) (071921) Argued January 6, 2014 -- Decided April 23, 2014 LaVEC

Wilson, Paul D., J. In this case, Plaintiff April Hamani sues Defendant Taisha Delk-Millien, the Office of the Commissioner of Probation (“Probation”), and the Executive Office of Public Safety and Security Department of Criminal Justice Information Services (“DCJIS”). The plaintiff complains about alleged improper dissemination of information about her criminal record by defendant Delk-Millien, asserting that Probation and DCJI

906 F.Supp. 1017 (1995) Louis A. MARKS, et al., Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, et al., Defendants. Civ. A. No. 4:95cv0050. United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Newport News Division. November 2, 1995. *1018 *1019 Louis A. Marks, Jr., Hampton, VA, Pro Se.</

Case: 12-13535 Date Filed: 08/28/2013 Page: 1 of 34 [PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT _____________ No. 12-13535 _____________ D.C. Docket No. 2:08-cv-00683-MEF-SRW TORREY TWANE MCNABB,

Case: 12-13535 Date Filed: 08/28/2013 Page: 1 of 34 [PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT _____________ No. 12-13535 Non-Argument Calendar _____________ D.C. Docket No. 2:08-cv-00683-MEF

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

Dissenting opinion by CATHELL, J. which BATTAGLIA, J., joins. I dissent. This is a tragic case. And it is not an isolated case. With the numbers of interactions between the Departments of Social Services and children these types of very tragic cases are repeated more often then any of us believe is acceptable. One is too many. We all know, however, that there will