Jack v. Commissioner of Social Security

Justia Dockets & Filings Eleventh Circuit Florida Middle District Jack v. Commissioner of Social Security

Jack v. Commissioner of Social Security

Plaintiff:	Todd M. Jack
Defendant:	Commissioner of Social Security
Case Number:	2:2014cv00723
Filed:	December 16, 2014
Court:	US District Court for the Middle District of Florida
Office:	Ft. Myers Office
County:	Lee
Presiding Judge:	Sheri Polster Chappell
Presiding Judge:	Douglas N. Frazier
Nature of Suit:	Retirement and Survivors Benefits
Cause of Action:	42 U.S.C. § 405
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
April 16, 2018	Filing 39 ORDER re 38 MOTION for miscellaneous relief, specifically filed by Todd M. Jack. Petitioner Todd M. Jack's Petition for the Continuance of the Complaint to Implement USA Federal Court Rule 62 38 is DENIED. Signed by Judge Sheri Polster Chappell on 4/16/2018. (LMF)
February 23, 2016	Filing 30 ORDER adopting 28 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 1 Complaint filed by Todd M. Jack. The Report and Recommendation 28 is ACCEPTED AND ADOPTED and the findings incorporated herein. The Commissioner's decision is REVERSED and REMANDED in part for the Commissioner to reconsider Plaintiff's impairments to determine if he has a medically determinable impairment that is severe or a combination of impairments that are severe, and to continue in the sequential evaluation, if appropriate. As to the remaining issues raised, the Commissioner's decision is AFFIRMED. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to enter judgment and close the case.Signed by Judge Sheri Polster Chappell on 2/23/2016. (LMF)

Date Filed

Document Text

April 16, 2018

Filing 39 ORDER re 38 MOTION for miscellaneous relief, specifically filed by Todd M. Jack. Petitioner Todd M. Jack's Petition for the Continuance of the Complaint to Implement USA Federal Court Rule 62 38 is DENIED. Signed by Judge Sheri Polster Chappell on 4/16/2018. (LMF)

February 23, 2016

Filing 30 ORDER adopting 28 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 1 Complaint filed by Todd M. Jack. The Report and Recommendation 28 is ACCEPTED AND ADOPTED and the findings incorporated herein. The Commissioner's decision is REVERSED and REMANDED in part for the Commissioner to reconsider Plaintiff's impairments to determine if he has a medically determinable impairment that is severe or a combination of impairments that are severe, and to continue in the sequential evaluation, if appropriate. As to the remaining issues raised, the Commissioner's decision is AFFIRMED. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to enter judgment and close the case.Signed by Judge Sheri Polster Chappell on 2/23/2016. (LMF)

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Florida Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Jack v. Commissioner of Social Security
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Todd M. Jack
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: Commissioner of Social Security
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?