Campbell v. Colvin

Plaintiff: Rebecca Campbell
Defendant: Carolyn W. Colvin
Case Number: 1:2014cv00501
Filed: June 9, 2014
Court: Alabama Middle District Court
Office: Dothan Office
County: Houston
Presiding Judge: Terry F. Moorer
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
December 3, 2015 18 Opinion or Order of the Court MEMORANDUM OPINION. The court has carefully and independently reviewed the record and concludes that, for the reasons given as further set out in the opinion, the decision of the Commissioner is REVERSED and REMANDED. A separate judgment will issue. Signed by Honorable Judge Terry F. Moorer on 12/3/2015. (dmn, )

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: Campbell v. Colvin
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Rebecca Campbell
Represented By: Micki Beth Stiller(Designation Retained)
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: Carolyn W. Colvin
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?