Fegel v. Commissioner of Social Security et al
Plaintiff: Steven A Fegel
Defendant: Commissioner of Social Security and SSA
Case Number: 3:2008cv00061
Filed: February 29, 2008
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio
Office: Social Security: SSID Tit. XVI Office
County: MONTGOMERY
Presiding Judge: Michael R Merz
Presiding Judge: Walter H Rice
Nature of Suit: None
Cause of Action: U.S. Government Defendant
Jury Demanded By: 42:405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
December 18, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 20 DECISION AND ORDER STRIKING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION - This Court has no authority to grant any reconsideration of a decision by the Court of Appeals, nor even any authority to accept motions on behalf of that Court. Plaintiff's Motion for Rec onsideration is STRICKEN. If he wishes to ask the Court of Appeals to reconsider, he should send a motion for reconsideration to that Court at the Potter Stewart Courthouse, Fifth and Walnut Streets, Cincinnati, Ohio 45202 and include in it the Court of Appeals case number which is 09-3727.Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R Merz on 12/17/2009. (kpf1)
July 13, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 17 ORDER ADOPTING 16 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS - it is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiff is DENIED 14 Leave to Appeal in forma pauperis. Signed by Judge Walter H Rice on 7/6/2009. (sc1, )
June 19, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 16 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING APPEAL - Because Plaintiff's Notice of Appeal is untimely, the Court of Appeals has no jurisdiction over the appeal, which is therefore legally frivolous. Plaintiff should therefore be denied leave to appeal in forma pauperis. Objections to R&R due by 7/9/2009. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R Merz on 6/19/2009. (kopf1, )
March 31, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 12 DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE (DOC. 10 ) IN THEIR ENTIRETY; PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS TO SAID JUDICIAL FILING (DOC. 11 ) OVERRULED; JUDGMENT TO BE ENTERED IN FAVOR OF DEFENDANT COMMISSION ER AND AGAINST PLAINTIFF, AFFIRMING COMMISSIONER'S DECISION THAT PLAINTIFF WAS NOT DISABLED AND, THEREFORE, NOT ENTITLED TO BENEFITS UNDER THE SOCIAL SECURITY ACT; TERMINATION ENTRY Signed by Judge Walter H Rice on 3/31/2009. (jdf1, ) Modified on 4/1/2009 to edit text(jdf1, ).
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 Ohio Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Fegel v. Commissioner of Social Security et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Steven A Fegel
Represented By: Donald Kenny Scott
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
Represented By: John J Stark
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: SSA
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?