Petero v. Colvin
Plaintiff: Karen S Petero
Defendant: CAROLYN W COLVIN
Case Number: 2:2016cv11389
Filed: April 18, 2016
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan
Office: Detroit Office
County: Macomb
Presiding Judge: Stephanie Dawkins Davis
Presiding Judge: Nancy G. Edmunds
Nature of Suit: Supplemental Security Income
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 205
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
September 6, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 18 ORDER Adopting Report and Recommendation 17 ; granting deft's motion for Summary Judgment 15 ; denying pltf's 14 Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by District Judge Nancy G. Edmunds. (CBet)
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: Petero v. Colvin
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: CAROLYN W COLVIN
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 ]
Plaintiff: Karen S Petero
Represented By: Wesley James Lamey
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?