Adams v. Social Security, Commissioner of
Plaintiff: Ronald Edmond Adams
Defendant: Social Security, Commissioner of
Case Number: 2:2012cv10430
Filed: February 1, 2012
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan
Office: Detroit Office
County: Oakland
Presiding Judge: Charles E. Binder
Presiding Judge: George Caram Steeh
Nature of Suit: Disability Insurance
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
March 26, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 19 ORDER accepting and adopting Report and Recommendation 15 denying 10 plaintiff's Motion and granting 13 defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by District Judge George Caram Steeh. (MBea)
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 Michigan Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Adams v. Social Security, Commissioner of
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Ronald Edmond Adams
Represented By: Kenneth D. Clayton
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: Social Security, Commissioner of
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?