Bayze v. Astrue

Plaintiff: Martin Bayze
Defendant: Michael J Astrue
Case Number: 4:2012cv00768
Filed: October 19, 2012
Court: Arizona District Court
Office: Tucson Division Office
County: Pima
Presiding Judge: Charles R Pyle
Nature of Suit: Social Security: SSID Tit. XVI
Cause of Action: 42:405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
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
May 21, 2014 39 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER adopting Report and Recommendations re 35 Report and Recommendation; The decision of the ALJ is REVERSED; This matter is REMANDED for an award of benefits, and; The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment in this case and shall then close its file in this matter.. Signed by Judge Cindy K Jorgenson on 5/20/2014.(JKM) Modified on 5/21/2014 (JKM). To add Opinion designation.

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: Bayze v. Astrue
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Martin Bayze
Represented By: Phillip B Verrette
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
Represented By: Laura Hope Holland
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?