Cherry v. Colvin
Plaintiff: William Cherry
Defendant: Carolyn W. Colvin
Case Number: 3:2013cv01440
Filed: September 30, 2013
Court: US District Court for the District of Connecticut
Office: New Haven Office
County: New Haven
Presiding Judge: William I. Garfinkel
Nature of Suit: Supplemental Security Income
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 0405
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 14, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 39 ORDER: The Recommended Ruling 26 of January 28, 2015 is APPROVED and ADOPTED, denying 18 Motion to Reverse the Decision of the Commissioner and granting 20 Motion to Affirm the Decision of the Commissioner. The decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED. The Clerk shall enter judgment and close the file. Signed by Judge Stefan R. Underhill on 1/14/2016. (Pollack, R.)
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 Connecticut District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Cherry v. Colvin
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: William Cherry
Represented By: Allan B. Rubenstein
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: 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 [ 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?