Anderson v. SSA

Plaintiff: Cheryl Anderson
Defendant: Commissioner of SSA
Case Number: 5:2017cv00304
Filed: July 20, 2017
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky
Office: Lexington Office
County: Boyle
Presiding Judge: Danny C. Reeves
Nature of Suit: Supplemental Security Income
Cause of Action: 42:405
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
February 9, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 14 JUDGMENT: (1) AFFIRMING the final administrative decision; (2) judgment in favor of Commissioner of Social Security; (3) this is a final & appealable judgment. Signed by Judge Danny C. Reeves on 2/9/18.(KJR)cc: COR . Modified text on 2/9/2018 (KJR).

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 Kentucky Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Anderson v. SSA
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Cheryl Anderson
Represented By: Amber Brahm Eubank
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Commissioner of SSA
Represented By: Cheryl D. Morgan(Designation Assistant U.S. Attorney)
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 [ 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?