Roesler v. Astrue
Plaintiff: Mary T. Roesler
Defendant: Michael J. Astrue
Case Number: 0:2012cv01982
Filed: August 14, 2012
Court: US District Court for the District of Minnesota
Office: DMN Office
County: Waseca
Presiding Judge: Jeffrey J. Keyes
Presiding Judge: John R. Tunheim
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
August 26, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 24 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER denying</> 9 Motion for Summary Judgment; granting 16 Motion for Summary Judgment; Adopt Report and Recommendation 19 Report and Recommendation. (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge John R. Tunheim on August 26, 2013. (DML)
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: Roesler 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: Mary T. Roesler
Represented By: David W VanDerHeyden
Represented By: Eddy Pierre Pierre
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: David W Fuller
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?