Farrow v. Berryhill (CONSENT)

Plaintiff: Robert Eugene Farrow
Defendant: Nancy A. Berryhill
Case Number: 3:2017cv00079
Filed: February 10, 2017
Court: Alabama Middle District Court
Office: Opelika Office
County: Lee
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
August 30, 2017 19 Opinion or Order of the Court MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING 17 MOTION to Remand ; the decision of the Commissioner is REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings pursuant to sentence four of 42 USC 405(g). Signed by Honorable Judge Wallace Capel, Jr on 8/30/17. Copy also mailed to SSA Chief Judge and SSA Office of Hearings and Appeals.(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: Farrow v. Berryhill (CONSENT)
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Robert Eugene Farrow
Represented By: Anna Ludlum King
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: Nancy A. Berryhill
Represented By: Stephen Michael Doyle(Designation Assistant U S Attorney)
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?