Thompson v. Astrue
Plaintiff: Dennis Owen Thompson
Defendant: Michael J. Astrue
Case Number: 1:2011cv00020
Filed: February 8, 2011
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Georgia
Office: Augusta Office
County: Richmond
Presiding Judge: W. Leon Barfield
Presiding Judge: J. Randal Hall
Nature of Suit: Supplemental Security Income
Cause of Action: 42:405
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
February 28, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 18 ORDER adopting the 16 Report and Recommendations, reversing the Commissioner's final decision pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), and remanding this case to the Commissioner further consideration in accordance with the Court's opinion. Signed by Judge J. Randal Hall on 02/28/2012. (thb)
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 Georgia Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Thompson 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 ]
Plaintiff: Dennis Owen Thompson
Represented By: Claudia J. McCracken
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?