O'Hara v. Astrue
Plaintiff: Barron O'Hara
Defendant: Michael J. Astrue
Case Number: 1:2010cv00448
Filed: August 16, 2010
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Alabama
Office: Mobile Office
County: Choctaw
Presiding Judge: Callie V. S. Granade
Presiding Judge: Katherine P. Nelson
Nature of Suit: Supplemental Security Income
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 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
September 9, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 24 Order that the decision of the Commissioner denying plaintiff's application for DIB and SSI benfeits is REVERSED and REMANDED for further evaluation of plaintiff's alleged mental retardation. Signed by Magistrate Judge Katherine P. Nelson on 9/9/2011. (srr)
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 Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: O'Hara v. Astrue
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Barron O'Hara
Represented By: William T. Coplin, Jr.
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: 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 [ 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?