Hayden v. Colvin

Plaintiff: Sara Rafford Hayden
Defendant: Carolyn W Colvin
Case Number: 4:2014cv02358
Filed: September 15, 2014
Court: Arizona District Court
Office: Tucson Division Office
County: Pima
Presiding Judge: Bernardo P Velasco
Nature of Suit: Disability Insurance
Cause of Action: 42:405
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
March 25, 2016 19 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER, The Commissioner's decision denying benefits is REVERSED; and this action is REMANDED to the Commissioner on an open record for further proceedings. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to enter Judgment accordingly and to close its file in this matter. Signed by Magistrate Judge Bernardo P Velasco on 3/25/2016. (See Order for complete details) (DPS)

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: Hayden v. Colvin
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Sara Rafford Hayden
Represented By: Karen Elizabeth Karl
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: Carolyn W Colvin
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?