Scretchen v. Astrue
Plaintiff: Charlene Scretchen
Defendant: Michael Astrue
Case Number: 5:2013cv00019
Filed: February 28, 2013
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Georgia
Office: Waycross Office
County: Ware
Presiding Judge: James E. Graham
Presiding Judge: Lisa G. Wood
Nature of Suit: Social Security: RSI Tax Suits
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 416 Denial of Social Security Benefits
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 14, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 21 ORDER granting 17 Motion for Attorney Fees. It is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiff is awarded attorney's fees in the amount of $1,095.00. 42 U.S.C. § 406(b)(1)(A). Signed by Chief Judge Lisa G. Wood on 3/14/2016. (csr)
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: Scretchen 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: Charlene Scretchen
Represented By: Kathy D. Hackel
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: Sanjay S. Karnik
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?