Roark v. SSA
Plaintiff: Darryl Glenn Roark
Defendant: SSA
Case Number: 6:2013cv00181
Filed: September 19, 2013
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky
Office: London Office
County: Harlan
Presiding Judge: Karen K. Caldwell
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
August 13, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 14 OPINION & ORDER: 1. The plaintiff's motion for summary judgment is DENIED; 2. The defendant's motion for summary judgment is GRANTED; 3. The decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED ; and 4. A judgment will be entered contemporaneously with this order. Signed by Judge Karen K. Caldwell on 8/13/14.(SYD)cc: COR
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: Roark v. SSA
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Darryl Glenn Roark
Represented By: Ronald C. Cox
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: SSA
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?