Johnson v. Berryhill

Johnson v. Berryhill

Plaintiff:	Mark D. Johnson
Defendant:	Nancy A. Berryhill
Case Number:	4:2018cv00725
Filed:	May 9, 2018
Court:	US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri
Office:	St. Louis Office
County:	St. Louis - County
Presiding Judge:	Patricia L. Cohen
Nature of Suit:	Disability Insurance
Cause of Action:	42 U.S.C. § 205
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
June 14, 2021	Filing 39 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: After careful consideration, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's petition for award of attorney fees [ECF No. 37 ] is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's counsel is awarded $14,550.00 in attorney fees pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 406(b), which shall be paid from the twenty-five percent of Plaintiffs past-due benefits that is being held by the SSA for direct payment to counsel of an authorized attorney fee. Signed by Magistrate Judge Patricia L. Cohen on 6/14/21. (JAB)
May 29, 2020	Filing 32 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER. (See Full Order.) For the reasons set forth above, the Court finds that the ALJ's assessment of the credibility of Plaintiff's subjective complaints is not supported by substantial evidence. Accordingly, IT IS HEREB Y ORDERED that, pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), the decision of the Commissioner is REVERSED, and this cause is REMANDED to the Commissioner for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. Signed by Magistrate Judge Patricia L. Cohen on 5/29/2020. (CBL)

Date Filed

Document Text

June 14, 2021

Filing 39 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: After careful consideration, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's petition for award of attorney fees [ECF No. 37 ] is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's counsel is awarded $14,550.00 in attorney fees pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 406(b), which shall be paid from the twenty-five percent of Plaintiffs past-due benefits that is being held by the SSA for direct payment to counsel of an authorized attorney fee. Signed by Magistrate Judge Patricia L. Cohen on 6/14/21. (JAB)

May 29, 2020

Filing 32 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER. (See Full Order.) For the reasons set forth above, the Court finds that the ALJ's assessment of the credibility of Plaintiff's subjective complaints is not supported by substantial evidence. Accordingly, IT IS HEREB Y ORDERED that, pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), the decision of the Commissioner is REVERSED, and this cause is REMANDED to the Commissioner for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. Signed by Magistrate Judge Patricia L. Cohen on 5/29/2020. (CBL)

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 Missouri Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Johnson v. Berryhill
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: Nancy A. Berryhill
Represented By:	Jane Rund(Designation Assistant US Attorney)
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 ]
Plaintiff: Mark D. Johnson
Represented By:	Traci L. Severs
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?