Stanley v. Berryhill
Plaintiff: Eloise Stanley
Defendant: Nancy A. Berryhill
Case Number: 3:2017cv00021
Filed: April 26, 2017
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Georgia
Office: Dublin Office
County: Laurens
Presiding Judge: Dudley H. Bowen
Presiding Judge: Brian K. Epps
Nature of Suit: Supplemental Security Income
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1383
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
May 8, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 21 ORDER ADOPTING 19 Report and Recommendations, REVERSING the Acting Commissioner's final decision and REMANDING this case to the Acting Commissioner for further consideration. Signed by Judge Dudley H. Bowen on 05/08/2018. (maa)
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: Stanley v. Berryhill
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Eloise Stanley
Represented By: Daryl J. Morton
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: Nancy A. Berryhill
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?