Dannels v. Astrue
Plaintiff: Roger E. Dannels
Defendant: Michael J Astrue
Case Number: 5:2007cv04122
Filed: October 26, 2007
Court: US District Court for the District of Kansas
Office: Topeka Office
County: Wilson
Presiding Judge: K. Gary Sebelius
Presiding Judge: Julie A. Robinson
Nature of Suit: Social Security: SSID Tit. XVI
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
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
September 11, 2008 Opinion or Order Filing 23 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 22 Report and Recommendations. The Court accepts the recommended decision and adopts it as its own. Signed by District Judge Julie A. Robinson on 9/11/2008.(mkc)
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 Kansas District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Dannels 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: Roger E. Dannels
Represented By: Steven M. Tilton
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 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 ]

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?