Gregory v. Astrue

Plaintiff: Eldon A. Gregory
Defendant: Michael J. Astrue
Case Number: 2:2008cv00387
Filed: February 28, 2008
Court: Arizona District Court
Office: Social Security: SSID Tit. XVI Office
County: Maricopa
Presiding Judge: Earl H Carroll
Nature of Suit: None
Cause of Action: U.S. Government Defendant
Jury Demanded By: 42:405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed#Document Text
March 6, 2009 27 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER granting in part and denying in part pla's 16 Motion for Summary Judgment. FURTHER ORDERED that dft's answering brief 25 , which the Court interpretes as a cross-motion for summary judgment, is granted in part and denied in part. FURTHER ORDERED that this case is remanded for further proceedings. Signed by Judge G Murray Snow on 3/5/2009. (LAD)

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 Arizona District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Gregory v. Astrue
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Eldon A. Gregory
Represented By: Eric Glenn Slepian
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
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?