Hillery v. Colvin
Plaintiff: Pamala Hillery
Defendant: Carolyn Colvin
Case Number: 1:2014cv13043
Filed: July 18, 2014
Court: US District Court for the District of Massachusetts
Office: Boston Office
County: Suffolk
Presiding Judge: Douglas P. Woodlock
Nature of Suit: Supplemental Security Income
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 405
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, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 7 Judge Douglas P. Woodlock: ORDER entered. The Court's records indicate that Hillery has not responded to the Court's Order. The time for responding to the Court's July 28, 2014 Memorandum and Order expired on September 1, 2014. Having received no response to that Memorandum and Order, it is hereby ORDERED that the above entitled action is hereby DISMISSED. The Clerk shall enter a separate order of dismissal.(PSSA, 4)
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 Massachusetts District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Hillery v. Colvin
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Pamala Hillery
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: Carolyn Colvin
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?