Longerbeam v. Astrue

Plaintiff: Carla A Longerbeam
Defendant: Michael J Astrue
Case Number: 3:2009cv00864
Filed: April 24, 2009
Court: California Southern District Court
Office: San Diego Office
County: San Diego
Referring Judge: Peter C. Lewis
Presiding Judge: Dana M. Sabraw
Nature of Suit: None
Cause of Action: 42:405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWW)
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 7, 2010 18 Opinion or Order of the Court CLERK'S JUDGMENT in favor of Michael J Astrue against Carla A Longerbeam. IT IS SO ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment is Denied. Defendant's cross-motion for summary judgment is Granted, and the decision of the Administrative Law Judge is Affirmed.(lao)

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 California Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Longerbeam v. Astrue
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Carla A Longerbeam
Represented By: Thomas Garrett Roche
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: U S Attorney CV
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?