Evans v. Colvin et al
Plaintiff: Shannon P. Evans
Defendant: Carolyn W. Colvin
Case Number: 0:2014cv01011
Filed: April 8, 2014
Court: US District Court for the District of Minnesota
Office: DMN Office
County: Fillmore
Presiding Judge: Tony N. Leung
Presiding Judge: John R. Tunheim
Nature of Suit: Supplemental Security Income
Cause of Action: 42:405
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 24, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 21 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 18 Report and Recommendation, 11 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Shannon P. Evans is DENIED, 14 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Carolyn W. Colvin is GRANTED (Written Opinion). Signed by Chief Judge John R. Tunheim on August 24, 2015. (HAZ)
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: Evans v. Colvin et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Shannon P. Evans
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: Carolyn W. Colvin
Represented By: Ann M Bildtsen
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?