Martin-Elder v. Astrue

Plaintiff: Margaret A. Martin-Elder
Defendant: Michael J. Astrue
Case Number: 1:2010cv00659
Filed: July 30, 2010
Court: Alabama Middle District Court
Office: Dothan Office
County: Coffee
Presiding Judge: Susan Russ Walker
Nature of Suit: Supplemental Security Income
Cause of Action: 42:405
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
January 28, 2011 15 Opinion or Order of the Court JUDGMENT granting the 14 Motion to Remand; reversing the Commissioner's decision; remanding the case to the Commissioner pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further proceedings as set forth in the Commissioner's motion. Signed by Honorable Susan Russ Walker on 1/28/2011. Copies mailed to SSA Chief Judge at the Office of Hearings and Appeals, and Bill Waxman. (br, )

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 Alabama Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Martin-Elder v. Astrue
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Margaret A. Martin-Elder
Represented By: Anna L. Chambers
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: Michael J. Astrue
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 should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?