MARTIN v. ASTRUE
Plaintiff: SCHARRON SCHERRE MARTIN
Defendant: MICHAEL ASTRUE
Case Number: 3:2011cv00164
Filed: April 4, 2011
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of Florida
Office: Pensacola Office
County: Escambia
Presiding Judge: M CASEY RODGERS
Presiding Judge: CHARLES J KAHN
Nature of Suit: Disability Insurance
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 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 5, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 19 ORDER adopting 18 Report and Recommendation. This cause is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE for pla's failure to prosecute and comply with orders of the court. The clerk is directed to close the file. Signed by CHIEF JUDGE M CASEY RODGERS on March 5, 2012. (kvg)
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 Florida Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: MARTIN v. ASTRUE
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: SCHARRON SCHERRE MARTIN
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: MICHAEL ASTRUE
Represented By: PETER GUNNAR FISHER
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?