U.S. Code » Title 42 » Chapter CHAPTER 144— DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES ASSISTANCE AND BILL OF RIGHTS › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER I— PROGRAMS FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES › Part Part A— General Provisions

42 U.S.C. § 4

APPLICATION AND ANNUAL REPORT.

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 42 CasesGoogle Scholar
“(a)Application.—“(1)In general.—To be eligible for a grant, contract, or cooperative agreement under subsection (a), (b), or (c) of section 3, Special Olympics shall submit an application at such time, in such manner, and containing such information as the Secretary of Education, Secretary of State, or Secretary of Health and Human Services, as applicable, may require.“(2)Content.—At a minimum, an application under this subsection shall contain the following:“(A)Activities.—A description of activities to be carried out with the grant, contract, or cooperative agreement.“(B)Measurable goals.—Information on specific measurable goals and objectives to be achieved through activities carried out with the grant, contract, or cooperative agreement.“(b)Annual Report.—“(1)In general.—As a condition on receipt of any funds under subsection (a), (b), or (c) of section 3, Special Olympics shall agree to submit an annual report at such time, in such manner, and containing such information as the Secretary of Education, Secretary of State, or Secretary of Health and Human Services, as applicable, may require.“(2)Content.—At a minimum, each annual report under this subsection shall describe the degree to which progress has been made toward meeting the goals and objectives described in the applications submitted under subsection (a).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14 cases, 1982–2014 · leading case: Phelps v. SSA, 2011 DNH 107 (D.N.H. 2011).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Phelps v. SSA, 2011 DNH 107 (D.N.H. 2011). “42 U.S.C. § 4 2 3 (d) (2) (A) . With those principles in mind, the court reviews the pending motions.”
Kathleen Price v. SSA, 2008 DNH 164 (D.N.H. 2008). “The 6 Because the ALJ's failure to develop the administrative record requires a sentence four remand, I need not address Price's alternative argument for a remand under sentence six of 42 U.S.C. § 4 0 5 (g). - 19 - clerk is directed to enter judgment in accordance with this…”
Aggen v. Schweiker, 553 F. Supp. 32 (D.S.D. 1982). “CASE SUMMARY Plaintiff has appealed to this Court seeking relief from a determination by the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services that Plaintiff was not disabled within the meaning of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 4 (d)(3). Section 405(g) of 42 U.”
Nadeau v. SSA, 2006 DNH 006 (D.N.H. 2006). “Standard of Review The applicable standard of review in this case provides, in pertinent part: The [district] court shall have power to enter, upon the pleadings and transcript of the record, a judgment affirming, modifying, or reversing the decision of the Commissioner of…”
Brown v. United States (Fed. Cl. 2014). “See 42 U.S.C. § 4 ()5(g) (2()12). Although it appears that plaintiff raised at least some claims to the SSA, it is not clear whether plaintiff would fall within the window of time for appealing to the district court.”
Smith v. SSA (D.N.H. 2011). “42 U.S.C. § 4 2 3 (d)(2)(A). With those principles in mind, the court reviews claimant's motion to reverse and the Commissioner's motion to affirm his decision.”
Rallis v. Soc. Sec. Admin., 2004 DNH 016 (D.N.H. 2004). “Barnhart, Commissioner, Social Security Administration O R D E R Ekaterini Rallis again seeks judicial review, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 4 0 5 ( g ) , of a decision by the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, denying her application for social security benefits…”
Monica Towne v. SSA, 2012 DNH 161 (D.N.H. 2012). “42 U.S.C. § 4 2 3 (d) (2) (A) . With those principles in mind, the court reviews claimant's motion to reverse and the Commissioner's motion to affirm his decision.”
Hynes v. SSA, 2005 DNH 094 (D.N.H. 2005). “42 U.S.C. § 4 2 3 (d)(2)(A). With those principles in mind, the court reviews claimant's motion to reverse and the Commissioner's motion to affirm the determination that claimant is not disabled.”
Redden v. SSA, 2009 DNH 076 (D.N.H. 2009). “42 U.S.C. § 4 2 3 (d) (2) (A) . In order to determine whether a claimant is disabled for the purpose of determining eligibility for disability insurance benefits, an ALJ is required to employ a five-step process.”
Snow v. SSA, 2011 DNH 161 (D.N.H. 2011). “42 U.S.C. § 4 2 3 (d)(2)(A). With those principles in mind, the court reviews claimant's motion to reverse and the Commissioner's motion to affirm his decision.”
Robidas v. SSA (D.N.H. 1999). “42 U.S.C. § 4 2 3 (d) (2) (A) . 6 With those principles in mind, the court reviews claimant's motion to reverse the decision of the Commissioner and the Commissioner's motion to affirm his decision.”
Show all 14 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.