Tucker v. Colvin
Plaintiff: David Earl Tucker
Defendant: Carolyn W. Colvin
Case Number: 1:2015cv01188
Filed: May 11, 2015
Court: US District Court for the Central District of Illinois
Office: Peoria Office
County: Peoria
Presiding Judge: Sara Darrow
Presiding Judge: Jonathan E. Hawley
Nature of Suit: Supplemental Security Income
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
June 14, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 16 ORDER and OPINION denying 8 Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment; and granting 14 Commissioner's Motion for Summary Affirmance. Civil Case Terminated. Entered by Magistrate Judge Jonathan E. Hawley on 6/14/2016. (RK, ilcd)
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 Illinois Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Tucker v. Colvin
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: David Earl Tucker
Represented By: Charles E Binder
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: Carolyn W. Colvin
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?