Watkins v. Astrue
Plaintiff: Terri Lynn Watkins
Defendant: Michael J Astrue
Case Number: 4:2011cv00282
Filed: May 7, 2011
Court: US District Court for the District of Arizona
Office: Tucson Division Office
County: Pima
Presiding Judge: Bernardo P Velasco
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
June 28, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 26 ORDER: Defendant's decision denying benefits is reversed. The case is remanded to Defendant for an award of benefits. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly. Signed by Magistrate Judge Bernardo P Velasco on 6/27/12. (See attached PDF for complete information.) (KAH)
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: Watkins 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: Terri Lynn Watkins
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 [ 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?