Turley v. Colvin

Turley v. Colvin

Plaintiff:	Tonya K. Turley
Defendant:	Michael J. Astrue
Case Number:	2:2012cv07191
Filed:	November 2, 2012
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia
Office:	Charleston Office
County:	Kanawha
Presiding Judge:	Thomas E. Johnston
Presiding Judge:	Mary E. Stanley
Nature of Suit:	Social Security: DIWC/DIWW
Cause of Action:	42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed	Document Text
June 27, 2014	Filing 24 CORRECTED MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER granting plaintiff's 11 MOTION to remand this case to the Commissioner of Social Security for consideration of new and material evidence; the Court DECLINES to adopt the 16 PROPOSED FINDINGS AND REC OMMENDATION; REVERSES the decision of the Commissioner; REMANDS this case for further proceedings pursuant to the sixth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g); directing the Commissioner to consider plaintiff's new evidence; and directing this case removed from the Court's Docket. Signed by Judge Thomas E. Johnston on 6/27/2014. (cc: attys; any unrepresented party) (taq)
February 18, 2014	Filing 18 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER the Court DECLINES to adopt the 16 Proposed Findings and Recommendation; REVERSES the decision of the Commissioner; REMANDS this case for further proceedings pursuant to the fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g); directing the Commissioner to consider Plaintiff's new evidence; and directing this case removed from the Court's Docket. Signed by Judge Thomas E. Johnston on 2/18/2014. (cc: attys; any unrepresented party) (taq)

Date Filed

Document Text

June 27, 2014

Filing 24 CORRECTED MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER granting plaintiff's 11 MOTION to remand this case to the Commissioner of Social Security for consideration of new and material evidence; the Court DECLINES to adopt the 16 PROPOSED FINDINGS AND REC OMMENDATION; REVERSES the decision of the Commissioner; REMANDS this case for further proceedings pursuant to the sixth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g); directing the Commissioner to consider plaintiff's new evidence; and directing this case removed from the Court's Docket. Signed by Judge Thomas E. Johnston on 6/27/2014. (cc: attys; any unrepresented party) (taq)

February 18, 2014

Filing 18 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER the Court DECLINES to adopt the 16 Proposed Findings and Recommendation; REVERSES the decision of the Commissioner; REMANDS this case for further proceedings pursuant to the fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g); directing the Commissioner to consider Plaintiff's new evidence; and directing this case removed from the Court's Docket. Signed by Judge Thomas E. Johnston on 2/18/2014. (cc: attys; any unrepresented party) (taq)

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 West Virginia Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Turley 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: Tonya K. Turley
Represented By:	Michael G. Miskowiec
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
Represented By:	Eric P. Kressman
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?