JACKSON-BOONE v. ASTRUE

Plaintiff: SARAH JACKSON-BOONE
Defendant: MICHAEL J ASTRUE
Case Number: 1:2013cv00034
Filed: February 12, 2013
Court: Florida Northern District Court
Office: Gainesville Office
County: Alachua
Referring Judge: GARY R JONES
Presiding Judge: MAURICE M PAUL
Nature of Suit: Social Security: DIWC/DIWW
Cause of Action: 42:405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWW)
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed#Document Text
March 12, 2014 16 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER re 1 Complaint filed by SARAH JACKSON-BOONE: Decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED. Clerk directed to enter final judgment and close the file. Signed by MAGISTRATE JUDGE GARY R JONES on 3/12/2014. (jws)

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 Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: JACKSON-BOONE v. ASTRUE
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: SARAH JACKSON-BOONE
Represented By: N ALBERT BACHARACH, JR
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: MICHAEL J ASTRUE
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 [ 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 were retrieved from PACER, and should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.