Cases

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE JORGE A. SOLIS, District Judge. The United States Magistrate Judge has issued Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation (“FCR”) in this case. No one has filed any objection to the FCR. After reviewing all relevant matters of record in this case, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Fed.R.Civ.P. 72, the Court

ORDER DAVID C. NORTON, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE This matter is before the court on United States Magistrate Judge Bristow Marchant’s Report and Recommendation (“R & R”) that this court affirm Acting Commissioner of Social Security Carolyn Colvin’s (the “Commissioner”) decision denying plaintiff Jo Ann Woodbury’s (“Woodbury”) claims for disability insurance benefits (“DIB”). Woodbury filed

Affirmed by published opinion. Judge MOTZ wrote the opinion, in which Judge KING and Judge DUNCAN joined. DIANA GRIBBON MOTZ, Circuit Judge: Social Security claimant Maurice Meyer appeals the district court’s denial of his motion for attorney’s fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (“the Act”). The Act provides that a party who prevails in litigatio

The indorsement on the first note has the legal effect to render the defendants in error Seale and Ray each liable as indorsers. Behrens v. Kirkgard, 143 S.W. 698. But as the statute (article 579, Vernon's Sayles' St.) was not complied with by the plaintiff, the court correctly ruled, it is thought, that such indorsers were discharged. For the plaintiff in his petition alleged and the proof shows that he had a lien on 60.8 acres of land, given by the maker t

Janet C. Hall, United States District Judge I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Deborah Lee Prince ("Prince") brings this appeal under section 405(g) of title 42 of the United States Code from the final decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration ("SSA"), which denied her application for Title II disability insurance benefits and Title XVI supplemental security income. See Comp

OPINION & ORDER ANDREW J. PECK, United States Magistrate Judge Plaintiff Michelle Laracuente, represented by counsel (Binder & Binder), brings this action pursuant to § 205(g) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), challenging the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying her Supplemental Security Income and Disability Insurance Benefits. (Dkt. No. 1: Compl.) Presently

OPINION AND ORDER William C. Lee, Judge, United States District Court This matter is before the court for judicial review of a final decision of the defendant Commissioner of Social Security Administration denying Plaintiffs application for Disability Insurance Benefits (DIB) and Supplemental Security Income (SSI), *737as provided for in the Social

OPINION AND ORDER ANDREW J. PECK, United States Magistrate Judge: Plaintiff Rolando Chaparro, represented by counsel (Binder & Binder), brings this action pursuant to § 205(g) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), challenging the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (the “Commissioner”) denying him Social Security disability insurance benefits (“DIB”). (Dkt. No. 1: C

OPINION & ORDER ANDREW J. PECK, United States Magistrate Judge: Francis Wilson, represented by counsel, brings this action pursuant to § 205(g) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), challenging the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (the “Commissioner”) denying him Disability Insurance Benefits (“DIB”). (Dkt. No. 2: Compl.) Presently before the Court are the par

MEMORANDUM OPINION JOHN D. BATES, United States District Judge Plaintiff brings this action under section 205(g) of the Social Security Act, see 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), for review of the denial of his application for supplemental security income benefits. This matter is before the Court on plaintiffs Motion for Judgment of Re

OPINION AND ORDER ANDREW J. PECK, United States Magistrate Judge: Plaintiff Joseph Suarez, represented by counsel (Sullivan & Kehoe), brings this action pursuant to § 205(g) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), challenging the final décision of the Commissioner of Social Security (the “Commissioner”) denying him Social Security disability insurance benefits (“DIB”). (Dkt

MEMORANDUM OPINION WILLIAM M. ACKER, JR., District Judge. I. PRELIMINARIES It has been over fifteen years since the undersigned has been given the responsibility for reviewing a disability denial by the Social Security Administration. When this court took senior status, it disassociated itself from Social Security appeals. For reasons that need not be stated, this court

MEMORANDUM OPINION VIRGINIA EMERSON HOPKINS, District Judge. Plaintiff Diann Ware, on behalf of her minor son J.P., brings this action pursuant to Title XVI of the Social Security Act. She seeks review of a final adverse decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration (“Commissioner”), who denied her application for Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”).2

OPINION & ORDER ANDREW J. PECK, United States Magistrate Judge. Pro se plaintiff John Flanigan brings this action pursuant to § 205(g) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), challenging the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (the “Commissioner”) denying Disability Insurance Benefits (“DIB”) and Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”) benefits. (Dkt. No. 2: Compl.) P

DECISION AND ORDER LYNN ADELMAN, District Judge. Plaintiff Bobbie Jean Tenhove applied for social security disability benefits, alleging inability to work due to multiple sclerosis, back problems, and other impairments, but the Social Security Administration (“SSA”) denied her application initially and on reconsideration. Plaintiff requested a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”),

State of Maryland v. Lionel Lee Prince, No. 1024, September Term, 2024. Opinion by Nazarian, J. APPELLATE REVIEW – STANDARD OF REVIEW – FINDINGS OF FACT – INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL The postconviction court made no factual findings as to the reasonableness of trial counsel’s decision not to object to certain cell site data testimony offered by a lay witness and instead based its holding that trial counsel’s performance was deficient on the legal conclusion that the cell site data testim

OPINION AND ORDER Steven P. Shreder, United States Magistrate Judge The claimant Roy Risley requests judicial review pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) of the decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration (“Commissioner”) denying benefits for his son A.D.R. under the Social Security Act. The claimant appeals the decision of the Commissioner and asserts that the Administrative Law Judge

267 F.Supp.2d 1225 (2003) John J. RIEBSAME, Plaintiff, v. Art Dion PRINCE, Brevard County Sheriffs Deputy, Individually; Phil Williams, Brevard County Sheriff, Individually; and Scott Ellis, Brevard County Clerk of Court, Individually; Defendants. No. 6:01-cv-1093-Orl-31JGG. United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Orlando Division. May 9, 2003.

51 Cal.Rptr.3d 546 (2006) 145 Cal.App.4th 289 Eve PRINCE, Cross-Complainant and Appellant, v. PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY, Cross-Defendant and Respondent. No. H028957. Court of Appeal of California, Sixth District. November 29, 2006. *547 Jon A. Heaberlin, Bernard P. Lahde, Rankin Landsness, Lahde,

Appeal from (1) a judgment of the County Court, in favor of defendant, entered January 15, 1973 in Delaware County, upon a decision of the court at a Trial Term without a jury; and (2) from an order of said court, entered January 15, 1973, which denied plaintiffs’ motion for a new trial In this action brought to establish title to realty pursuant to article 15 of the Real Property Actions and Proceedings Law, plaintiffs claim. title to a 10-acre parcel of l