Search for: "PEREZ v. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION" Results 21 - 36 of 36
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
24 Jun 2014, 6:21 am by Joy Waltemath
As noted in the attorney general’s report, however, the Social Security Administration and Department of Veterans Affairs are prohibited by federal statute from adopting this approach for certain programs “of critical importance to millions of Americans. [read post]
14 Feb 2014, 12:00 pm by Mary Pat Dwyer
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 13-445Issue: (1) Whether the cost-causation principle underlying the “just and reasonable” standard of the Federal Power Act permits the socialization of costs across a regional transmission network without regard to the actual costs caused or benefits received by customers required to pay those costs; and (2) whether an administrative agency may concededly rely upon extra-record evidence without providing the parties notice and an… [read post]
10 Feb 2014, 4:16 pm by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer
District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, Eastern Division, the In the Matter of: Perez v. [read post]
26 Dec 2013, 5:29 pm by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer
A primary drafter of the Bolivian Social Security pension privatization law, Ms. [read post]
9 Oct 2013, 11:14 am by Larry Catá Backer
McClung, 379 U.S. 274 (1964) (Commerce power extended to application of anti-discrimination statute to a local restaurant that served almost purely local customers where its food was ordered in interstate commerce); Perez v. [read post]
25 Jun 2008, 10:28 am
On January 17, 2007, the Government also checked Nevada Department of Motor Vehicle records which revealed a current driver's license for Luana Carter, with the same social security number, date of birth and physical address obtained through LexisNexis. [read post]
30 Oct 2007, 1:37 am
Keisler, No. 06-60644"Pakistani native's petition for review of a denial of his application for cancellation of removal from the United States is denied as misuse of a social security number in violation of 42 U.S.C. section 408(a)(7)(A) falls within the definition a crime involving moral turpitude, for purposes of ineligibility for a grant of cancellation of removal. [read post]