Williams v. Colvin

Williams v. Colvin

Plaintiff:	Vivian Williams
Defendant:	Carolyn W. Colvin
Case Number:	1:2014cv03222
Filed:	May 2, 2014
Court:	US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
Office:	Chicago Office
County:	Cook
Presiding Judge:	Matthew F. Kennelly
Nature of Suit:	Supplemental Security Income
Cause of Action:	42 U.S.C. § 405
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
December 28, 2015	Filing 36 MEMORANDUM Opinion and Order written by the Honorable Matthew F. Kennelly on 12/28/2015: For the foregoing reasons, the Court concludes that the ALJ's decision is not supported by substantial evidence and therefore grants plaintiff's motio n for summary judgment and denies defendant's cross-motion [dkt. nos. 22, 30]. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment stating that the decision denying plaintiff's claim for disability benefits is vacated and that the matter is remanded to the Commissioner for further consideration in light of this decision. The Court also notes that this is the second time this particular ALJ's decision regarding Williams's claim for disability benefits has been overturned. Because the reco rd suggests that the ALJ may not be able to evaluate Williams' case fairly, the Court strongly urges the Commissioner to assign a different ALJ to handle any additional proceedings. See Terry v. Astrue, 580 F.3d 471, 478 (7th Cir. 2009); Golembiewski v. Barnhart, 322 F.3d 912, 922 (7th Cir. 2003). Mailed notice. (pjg, )

Date Filed

Document Text

December 28, 2015

Filing 36 MEMORANDUM Opinion and Order written by the Honorable Matthew F. Kennelly on 12/28/2015: For the foregoing reasons, the Court concludes that the ALJ's decision is not supported by substantial evidence and therefore grants plaintiff's motio n for summary judgment and denies defendant's cross-motion [dkt. nos. 22, 30]. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment stating that the decision denying plaintiff's claim for disability benefits is vacated and that the matter is remanded to the Commissioner for further consideration in light of this decision. The Court also notes that this is the second time this particular ALJ's decision regarding Williams's claim for disability benefits has been overturned. Because the reco rd suggests that the ALJ may not be able to evaluate Williams' case fairly, the Court strongly urges the Commissioner to assign a different ALJ to handle any additional proceedings. See Terry v. Astrue, 580 F.3d 471, 478 (7th Cir. 2009); Golembiewski v. Barnhart, 322 F.3d 912, 922 (7th Cir. 2003). Mailed notice. (pjg, )

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 Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Williams 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: Vivian Williams
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
Represented By:	AUSA-SSA(Designation Assistant US Attorney)
Represented By:	David R Lidow
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?