Massengale v. Astrue (CONSENT)

Plaintiff: Jerome Massengale
Defendant: Michael J. Astrue
Case Number: 2:2012cv00285
Filed: March 29, 2012
Court: Alabama Middle District Court
Office: Montgomery Office
County: Coosa
Presiding Judge: Wallace Capel
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
October 25, 2012 16 Opinion or Order of the Court MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING 15 MOTION to Remand; the decision of the Commissioner is REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings pursuant to sentence four of 42 USC 405(g), and for the reasons set forth in the motion. Signed by Honorable Judge Wallace Capel, Jr on 10/25/12. Also mailed to SSA Office of Hearings & Appeals and Chief Judge SSA.(djy, )

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: Massengale v. Astrue (CONSENT)
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Jerome Massengale
Represented By: Brian Roy Carmichael
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
Represented By: Stephen Michael Doyle
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?