Duffy v. Colvin
Plaintiff: John Duffy
Defendant: Carolyn W Colvin
Case Number: 1:2016cv10719
Filed: April 15, 2016
Court: US District Court for the District of Massachusetts
Office: Boston Office
County: Barnstable
Presiding Judge: Patti B. Saris
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 7, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 24 Chief Judge Patti B. Saris: MEMORANDUM and ORDER entered. Duffy's motion to reverse the decision of the Commissioner (Docket No. 13 ) is DENIED. The Commissioner's motion to affirm (Docket No. 17 ) is ALLOWED. (Geraldino-Karasek, Clarilde)
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 Massachusetts District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Duffy 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: John Duffy
Represented By: Morris Greenberg
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: Rayford A. Farquhar
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?