Meyer v. Astrue

Meyer v. Astrue

Plaintiff:	Dale F. Meyer
Defendant:	Michael J. Astrue
Case Number:	0:2009cv03205
Filed:	November 17, 2009
Court:	US District Court for the District of Minnesota
Office:	DMN Office
County:	Goodhue
Presiding Judge:	Davis
Presiding Judge:	Erickson
Nature of Suit:	Other
Cause of Action:	42 U.S.C. § 205 Denial Social Security Benefits
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
September 12, 2011	Filing 33 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 31 Report and Recommendation. (Written Opinion). Plaintiff Dale F. Meyers Motion for Attorney Fees 20 be GRANTED. Plaintiff Dale F. Meyer be awarded $4070.00 in reasonable attorneys fees, subj ect to offset by any preexisting debt that he owes to the United States. Pursuant to the assignment of EAJA Fee award signed by Plaintiff and filed with this Court 23 , the Commissioner be directed to pay the above-awarded fees, minus any applicable offset, directly to Neut L. Strandemo.Signed by Chief Judge Michael J. Davis on 9/12/11. (KMW)
February 3, 2011	Filing 18 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 16 Report and Recommendation. (Written Opinion) Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment 11 is DENIED. Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment 9 is GRANTED IN PART, for remand for further consideration of whether claimant is entitled to a finding of disability pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), and DENIED as to an award of benefits. Signed by Chief Judge Michael J. Davis on 2/3/11. (KMW)

Date Filed

Document Text

September 12, 2011

Filing 33 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 31 Report and Recommendation. (Written Opinion). Plaintiff Dale F. Meyers Motion for Attorney Fees 20 be GRANTED. Plaintiff Dale F. Meyer be awarded $4070.00 in reasonable attorneys fees, subj ect to offset by any preexisting debt that he owes to the United States. Pursuant to the assignment of EAJA Fee award signed by Plaintiff and filed with this Court 23 , the Commissioner be directed to pay the above-awarded fees, minus any applicable offset, directly to Neut L. Strandemo.Signed by Chief Judge Michael J. Davis on 9/12/11. (KMW)

February 3, 2011

Filing 18 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 16 Report and Recommendation. (Written Opinion) Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment 11 is DENIED. Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment 9 is GRANTED IN PART, for remand for further consideration of whether claimant is entitled to a finding of disability pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), and DENIED as to an award of benefits. Signed by Chief Judge Michael J. Davis on 2/3/11. (KMW)

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 Minnesota District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Meyer v. Astrue
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Dale F. Meyer
Represented By:	Neut L Strandemo
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: Michael J. Astrue
Represented By:	Lonnie F Bryan
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?