Matherson v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner
Plaintiff: Darlene Genise Matherson
Defendant: Social Security Administration, Commissioner
Case Number: 2:2012cv03588
Filed: October 12, 2012
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of Alabama
Office: Southern Office
County: Jefferson
Presiding Judge: T Michael Putnam
Nature of Suit: Social Security: SSID Tit. XVI
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
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
February 10, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 16 MEMORANDUM OPINION Signed by Chief Judge Karon O Bowdre on 2/10/14. (SAC )
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 Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Matherson v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Darlene Genise Matherson
Represented By: Darryl W Hunt
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: Social Security Administration, Commissioner
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?