Hooks v. Berryhill

Plaintiff: Tasha R Hooks
Defendant: Nancy A. Berryhill
Case Number: 1:2017cv00229
Filed: May 22, 2017
Court: Alabama Southern District Court
Office: Mobile Office
County: Mobile
Referring Judge: Katherine P. Nelson
Presiding Judge: William H. Steele
Nature of Suit: Disability Insurance
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
March 29, 2018 18 Opinion or Order of the Court MEMORANDUM AND OPINION: In accordance with the foregoing analysis, it is ORDERED that the Commissioner's December 23, 2016 final decision denying Hooks' application for DIB is AFFIRMED under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). Signed by Magistrate Judge Katherine P. Nelson on 3/28/18. (mpp) Copies to counsel

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: Hooks v. Berryhill
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Tasha R Hooks
Represented By: Ashley Brooke Thomas
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
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?