Betts v. Astrue

Plaintiff: Michael Anthony Betts
Defendant: Michael J Astrue
Case Number: 2:2010cv02189
Filed: October 14, 2010
Court: Arizona District Court
Office: Phoenix Division Office
County: Maricopa
Presiding Judge: Neil V Wake
Nature of Suit: Social Security: DIWC/DIWW
Cause of Action: 42:405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
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 23, 2011 20 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER, affirming the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying Michael Anthony Betts disability benefits. That the Clerk enter judgment in favor of Defendant against Plaintiff and that Plaintiff take nothing. The Clerk shall terminate this action. Signed by Judge Neil V Wake on 8/22/11. (DMT)

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: Betts v. Astrue
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Michael J Astrue
Represented By: Michael A Johns
Represented By: Pamela M Wood
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 ]
Plaintiff: Michael Anthony Betts
Represented By: Mark Ross Caldwell
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?