Hatfield v. Astrue

Hatfield v. Astrue

Plaintiff:	Everly K. Hatfield
Defendant:	Michael J. Astrue
Case Number:	5:2008cv00160
Filed:	March 13, 2008
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia
Office:	Beckley Office
County:	Wyoming
Presiding Judge:	Thomas E. Johnston
Presiding Judge:	R. Clarke VanDervort
Nature of Suit:	Social Security: HIA
Cause of Action:	42 U.S.C. § 205 Denial Social Security Benefits
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
March 24, 2009	Filing 17 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: Plaintiff's Objections 16 are overruled; The Court Adopts the recommendation contained in the 15 Proposed Findings and Recommendations; Denies Plaintiff's 12 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings ; Grants Defendant's 14 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; Affirms the final decision of the Commissioner and DISMISSES the matter from the Court's docket. Signed by Judge Thomas E. Johnston on 3/24/2009. (cc: attys; any unrepresented party) (cds)
February 27, 2009	Filing 15 PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS recommending that the District Court DENY 12 MOTION by Everly K. Hatfield for Judgment on the Pleadings, GRANT Defendant's 14 MOTION for Judgment on the Pleadings, affirm the decision of the Commissioner , and dismiss this matter from the Court's docket. This case no longer referred to Magistrate Judge R. Clarke VanDervort. Objections to Proposed F&R due by 3/16/2009. Signed by Magistrate Judge R. Clarke VanDervort on 2/27/2009. (cc: attys; any unrepresented party) (slr)

Date Filed

Document Text

March 24, 2009

Filing 17 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: Plaintiff's Objections 16 are overruled; The Court Adopts the recommendation contained in the 15 Proposed Findings and Recommendations; Denies Plaintiff's 12 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings ; Grants Defendant's 14 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; Affirms the final decision of the Commissioner and DISMISSES the matter from the Court's docket. Signed by Judge Thomas E. Johnston on 3/24/2009. (cc: attys; any unrepresented party) (cds)

February 27, 2009

Filing 15 PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS recommending that the District Court DENY 12 MOTION by Everly K. Hatfield for Judgment on the Pleadings, GRANT Defendant's 14 MOTION for Judgment on the Pleadings, affirm the decision of the Commissioner , and dismiss this matter from the Court's docket. This case no longer referred to Magistrate Judge R. Clarke VanDervort. Objections to Proposed F&R due by 3/16/2009. Signed by Magistrate Judge R. Clarke VanDervort on 2/27/2009. (cc: attys; any unrepresented party) (slr)

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: Hatfield 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: Everly K. Hatfield
Represented By:	Juliet Walker Rundle
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:	Michael McGaughran
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?