MARTIN v. ASTRUE
Plaintiff: SUE RUDD MARTIN
Defendant: MICHAEL J ASTRUE and SSAOGC
Case Number: 5:2009cv00335
Filed: October 5, 2009
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of Florida
Office: Panama City Office
County: Holmes
Presiding Judge: MILES DAVIS
Presiding Judge: STEPHAN P MICKLE
Nature of Suit: None
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
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 6, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 31 ORDER ADOPTING 29 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: Commissioner's decision is AFFIRMED. Signed by CHIEF JUDGE STEPHAN P MICKLE on 1/6/2011. (jws)
March 9, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 22 ORDER re 20 Answer to Complaint filed by MICHAEL J ASTRUE. Plaintiff shall have 60 days to file a memorandum not to exceed twenty-five (25) pages in support of his complaint. Defendant shall within thirty days of service of pla intiff's memo file a response, also not to exceed twenty-five (25) pages. The clerk of court is directed to return this file to the undersigned no later than the due date of defendant's response. (Memorandum in Support due by 5/7/2010, Memorandum in Opposition due by 6/7/2010, and Notify Chambers on 6/7/2010). Signed by MAGISTRATE JUDGE MILES DAVIS on 3/9/10. (lcu)
December 1, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 12 ORDER re 1 Complaint, 8 Order - - 1. Plaintiff shall submit three services copies of his complaint, using the caption set out above with the correctly named plaintiff, within 15 days. - 2. Upon receipt of the copies of the com plaint, the clerk of court is directed to send three certified copies of this order, the service copies of the complaint, and the prepared USM 285 forms to the United States Marshal. - - - (Service Copies due by 12/16/2009.)- - - Signed by MAGISTRATE JUDGE MILES DAVIS on December 1, 2009. (cbj)
October 29, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 10 ORDER re 1 Complaint filed by SUE RUDD MARTIN. - - JIM S MARTIN, surviving spouse, has been substituted as plaintiff (doc 8 ). - - The pending 3 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis is Denied without prejudice. - - Within thirty (30) days from the date of this order, plaintiff shall either pay the full $350.00 filing fee, or submit a new motion to proceed in forma pauperis along with an affidavit of financial status reflecting the assets of Sue Rudd Martin, as set forth herein. - - (Filing Fee due by 11/30/2009 ; Alternatively, IFP Motion due by 11/30/2009. ) - - Signed by MAGISTRATE JUDGE MILES DAVIS on October 29, 2009. (cbj)
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 ]
Defendant: MICHAEL J ASTRUE
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: SSAOGC
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: SUE RUDD MARTIN
Represented By: QUINN ERIC BROCK
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?