Handy v. Colvin
Plaintiff: Roland Eddie Handy
Defendant: Michael Astrue
Case Number: 1:2009cv00166
Filed: January 26, 2009
Court: US District Court for the District of Maryland
Office: Baltimore Office
County: Wicomico
Presiding Judge: Paul W. Grimm
Nature of Suit: Social Security: DIWC/DIWW
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
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
December 22, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 58 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER DENYING 55 Motion of Defendant for Summary Judgment; DENYING AS MOOT 57 Motion of Plaintiff for Extension of Time to File Response; REVERSING IN PART the Commissioner's judgment; REMANDING case for further proceedings. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stephanie A Gallagher on 12/21/2015. (c/m 12/22/15)(hmls, Deputy Clerk)
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 Maryland District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Handy 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: Roland Eddie Handy
Represented By: Paul Rodney Schlitz, Jr
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 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?