Emery v. Berryhill

Plaintiff: Jean Paul R. Emery
Defendant: Nancy A. Berryhill
Case Number: 0:2017cv01988
Filed: June 11, 2017
Court: Minnesota District Court
Office: DMN Office
County: St. Louis
Presiding Judge: Tony N. Leung
Nature of Suit: Disability Insurance
Cause of Action: 42:205
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 17, 2018 25 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER granting 19 Motion for Summary Judgment; denying 22 Motion for Summary Judgment. The Commissioner's decision is VACATED as to steps four and five and this matter is REMANDED pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) forfurther proceedings consistent with this opinion. (Written Opinion) Signed by Magistrate Judge Tony N. Leung on 9/17/2018. (GFK)

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: Emery v. Berryhill
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Jean Paul R. Emery
Represented By: Edward C. Olson
Represented By: Karl E. Osterhout
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Nancy A. Berryhill
Represented By: Bahram Samie
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 [ 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?