Watson v. Saul
Plaintiff: Ricardo R Watson
Defendant: Andrew Saul
Interested Party: Social Security Administration
Case Number: 3:2019cv01504
Filed: September 25, 2019
Court: US District Court for the District of Connecticut
Presiding Judge: Sarah A L Merriam
Referring Judge: Robert M Spector
2 Judge: Stefan R Underhill
Nature of Suit: Social Security: SSID Tit. XVI
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1383
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on September 24, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
September 25, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 6 ORDER granting #2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. Plaintiff has filed a motion seeking to proceed without payment of fees and costs, which motion includes a sworn statement as to plaintiff's current financial circumstances. See Doc. #2 . Plaintiff has completed the required information. He asserts that he is unable to afford to pay fees and costs, having no assets and having been unemployed since 2003. See generally id. at 3-4. Plaintiff also states that he receives "cash assistance" from the state and monthly food stamps. See id. at 3, 5. At this stage, such allegations are sufficient to establish that plaintiff is unable to pay the ordinary filing fees required by the Court. See 28 U.S.C. 1915(a)(1). Accordingly, plaintiff's #2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis is GRANTED. It is so ordered. Signed by Judge Sarah A. L. Merriam on 09/25/2019. (Spangenburg, S.)
September 25, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 5 ELECTRONIC FILING ORDER FOR COUNSEL - PLEASE ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH COURTESY COPY REQUIREMENTS IN THIS ORDER Signed by Judge Stefan R Underhill on 9/25/2019. (Oliver, T.)
September 25, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 4 STANDING SCHEDULING ORDER: Signed by Judge Stefan R Underhill on 9/25/2019. (Oliver, T.)
September 25, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 3 Standing Order on Social Security Appeals. Signed by Judge Stefan R Underhill on 9/25/2019. (Attachments: #1 Consent form) (Oliver, T.)
September 25, 2019 Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Ricardo R Watson. (Ciccarillo, Dennis)
September 25, 2019 Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Andrew Saul, filed by Ricardo R Watson.(Ciccarillo, Dennis)
September 25, 2019 Judge Stefan R Underhill and Judge Sarah A. L. Merriam added. Motions referred to Sarah A. L. Merriam (Oliver, T.)
September 25, 2019 Answer deadline updated for Andrew Saul to 11/24/2019. (Oliver, T.)

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: Watson v. Saul
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Andrew Saul
Represented By: Andreea Lechleitner
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 ]
Plaintiff: Ricardo R Watson
Represented By: Dennis G. Ciccarillo
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 ]
Interested party: Social Security Administration
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?