Ennis v. Saul
| Merle L. Ennis |
| Andrew M. Saul |
| SSA Office of General Counsel |
| 4:2020cv00434 |
| March 24, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri |
| Catherine D Perry |
| Social Security: DIWC/DIWW |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 205 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 1, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 5
CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER: This case has been assigned to Track 4 (Administrative). Signed by District Judge Catherine D. Perry on March 24, 2020. (BRP)
|
|
Filing 4
ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis [#2 ] is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall issue process or cause process to issue on the complaint. Signed by District Judge Catherine D. Perry on March 24, 2020. (BRP)
|
| Filing 3 FINANCIAL AFFIDAVIT - CJA 23 by Plaintiff Merle L. Ennis. (MFG) |
| Filing 2 First MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Plaintiff Merle L. Ennis. (Attachments: #1 Affidavit CJA23 Financial)(Severs, Traci) |
| Filing 1 Social Security COMPLAINT Non-Jury Demand,Yes or No - Yes,, filed by Merle L. Ennis. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Original Filing Form, #3 Summons Andrew Saul, #4 Summons Jeffrey Jensen, #5 Summons William Barr)(Severs, Traci) |
| Case Opening Notification: Judge Assigned: Honorable Catherine D. Perry. (MFG) |
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
