Majors v. Astrue
Plaintiff: Gail Majors
Defendant: Michael J. Astrue
Case Number: 4:2012cv40166
Filed: December 18, 2012
Court: US District Court for the District of Massachusetts
Office: Worcester Office
County: Worcester
Presiding Judge: Timothy S Hillman
Nature of Suit: Social Security: SSID Tit. XIV
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
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
February 7, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 26 District Judge Timothy S Hillman: MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER entered granting 16 Motion for Order Reversing Decision of Commissioner and denying 22 Motion for Order Affirming Decision of Commissioner. (Castles, Martin)
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: Majors v. Astrue
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Gail Majors
Represented By: Stephan Parks
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: 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 [ 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?