Corrigan v. BERRYHILL
Plaintiff: Cathy K. Corrigan
Defendant: NANCY A BERRYHILL
Case Number: 2:2017cv10856
Filed: March 17, 2017
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan
Office: Detroit Office
County: Wayne
Presiding Judge: David R. Grand
Presiding Judge: Arthur J. Tarnow
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
August 28, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 14 ORDER Adopting 13 Report and Recommendation Granting part and denying in part 10 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Cathy K. Corrigan, and Denying 12 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by NANCY A BERRYHILL,Report and Recommendation; Remanding case. Signed by District Judge Arthur J. Tarnow. (DTof)
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: Corrigan 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: Cathy K. Corrigan
Represented By: Marc J. Shefman
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?