Sutton v. Berryhill
Plaintiff: Richard Elton Sutton
Defendant: Nancy A. Berryhill
Case Number: 1:2017cv12253
Filed: November 15, 2017
Court: US District Court for the District of Massachusetts
Office: Boston Office
County: Essex
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
February 20, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 18 Chief Judge Patti B. Saris: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: The Court ALLOWS Plaintiff's motion for judgment on the pleadings (Dkt. No. 12 ) and remands the action, and DENIES Defendant's motion to affirm the Commissioner's decision (Dkt. No. 15 ).(Lara, Miguel)
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: Sutton v. Berryhill
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Richard Elton Sutton
Represented By: Stephen L. Raymond
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: Nancy A. Berryhill
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?