Clark v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration

Plaintiff: Elouise Clark
Defendant: Commissioner of Social Security Administration
Case Number: 9:2013cv00954
Filed: April 10, 2013
Court: South Carolina District Court
Office: Beaufort Office
County: Richland
Referring Judge: Bristow Marchant
Presiding Judge: David C Norton
Nature of Suit: Social Security: SSID Tit. XVI
Cause of Action: 42:405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
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
May 19, 2014 20 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER affirming 18 Report and Recommendation; the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security Administration is affirmed. Signed by Honorable David C Norton on 5/19/2014.(eric, )

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 South Carolina District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Clark v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Elouise Clark
Represented By: Beatrice E Whitten
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: Commissioner of Social Security Administration
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.