No. 18-5448

Ellen Elizabeth Packenham Stanley v. Nancy A. Berryhill, Acting Commissioner of Social Security

Lower Court: Eighth Circuit
Docketed: 2018-08-06
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: 42-usc-405(h) administrative-law civil-procedure civil-rights due-process jurisdiction pro-se pro-se-appellant social-security-administration standing stare-decisis tort tort-claim venue venue-jurisdiction
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference: 2018-10-05
Question Presented (from Petition)

Is the U.S. Federal District Court of Minnesota the appropriate venue and jurisdiction to present an Appeal for a suit Sounding in Tort against the Social Security Administration (SSA) when correctly submitted on Standard Form 95, Prescribed by the Department of Justice (Form No. NSN 7540-00-634-4046).

Do the words "arising under" as applied to benefit claims under U.S. Code, Title 42, Chapter 7, Subchapter II § 405(h) by previous courts also apply to the law when said claim is presented as a separate suit for tortfeasance.

Does the precedence of common law (stare decisis) set for Corporate Appellants regarding timeliness also apply to Pro-Se Appellants.

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the U.S. Federal District Court of Minnesota is the appropriate venue and jurisdiction to present an appeal for a tort suit against the Social Security Administration (SSA) when submitted on Standard Form 95

Docket Entries

2018-10-09
Petition DENIED.
2018-09-13
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/5/2018.
2018-09-05
Waiver of right of respondent Nancy A. Berryhill, Deputy Commissioner for Operations, Social Security Administration to respond filed.
2018-07-30
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due September 5, 2018)

Attorneys

Ellen E. Packenham Stanley
Ellen E. Packenham Stanley — Petitioner
Nancy A. Berryhill, Deputy Commissioner for Operations, Social Security Administration
Noel J. FranciscoSolicitor General, Respondent