Grissom v. Social Security Administration

Plaintiff: Michael Grissom
Defendant: Social Security Administration
Case Number: 3:2011cv00254
Filed: November 18, 2011
Court: Arkansas Eastern District Court
Office: Jonesboro Office
County: Clay
Presiding Judge: Beth Deere
Nature of Suit: Supplemental Security Income
Cause of Action: 42:206
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
January 8, 2013 15 Opinion or Order of the Court JUDGMENT pursuant to 14 Memorandum And Order affirming the decision of the Commissioner. Mr. Grissom's complaint is dismissed with prejudice. Signed by Magistrate Judge Beth Deere on 1/8/2013. (jak)

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 Arkansas Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Grissom v. Social Security Administration
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Social Security Administration
Represented By: Stacey Elise McCord
Represented By: Michael A. Moss
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 Grissom
Represented By: Anthony W. Bartels
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?