Albert v. Astrue

Plaintiff: Mary Elizabeth Albert
Defendant: Michael J. Astrue
Case Number: 4:2008cv00267
Filed: April 25, 2008
Court: Arizona District Court
Office: Social Security: SSID Tit. XVI Office
County: Pima
Referring Judge: Charles R Pyle
Presiding Judge: Frank R Zapata
Nature of Suit: None
Cause of Action: U.S. Government Defendant
Jury Demanded By: 42:205 Denial Social Security Benefits

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed#Document Text
June 1, 2011 27 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER granting 16 Motion for Summary Judgment, case is remanded for an immediate award of benefits; denying 19 Motion for Summary Judgment; adopting Report and Recommendations re 25 Report and Recommendations. This case is dismissed. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly. Signed by Senior Judge Frank R Zapata on 6/1/11.(BAR)

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: Albert v. Astrue
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Mary Elizabeth Albert
Represented By: David Anaise
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?