Degnan v Leavitt et al
||Michael J Astrue and Michael O. Leavitt
||Charles A Degnan
||February 6, 2008
||Minnesota District Court
|Nature of Suit:
||Social Security: HIA
|Cause of Action:
||42:1395 HHS: Adverse Reimbursement Review
|Jury Demanded By:
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|Date Filed||#||Document Text|
|June 19, 2009
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION to grant in part and deny in part 24 Cross MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by SSA, Michael J Astrue, Michael O. Leavitt and 20 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Charles A Degnan; and that the case be remanded to the Secretary for calculation of Medicare Part B premiums beginning in the year 2004, and each subsequent year, consistent with the process spelled out in this Report and Recommendation, and Plaintiff should be refunded any amount due. Objections to R&R due by 7/6/2009. Signed by Magistrate Judge Arthur J. Boylan on 6/19/09. (kt)
|September 28, 2009
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopting 28 Report and Recommendation; granting in part and denying in part 20 Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment; granting in part and denying in part 24 Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment; Defe ndant's Objections 34 are Overruled. The matter is remanded to Defendant for calculation of Medicare Part B premiums beginning in the year 2004, and each subsequent year, consistent with the process explicated in the R&R (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge Ann D. Montgomery on 09/28/2009. (TLU)
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 Minnesota District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
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.