Sharrock v. Saul
| Jaime E. Sharrock |
| Andrew M. Saul |
| 3:2021cv05012 |
| January 22, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Missouri |
| Stephen R Bough |
| Lajuana M Counts |
| Social Security: DIWC/DIWW |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 405 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 9, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 5 RETURN OF SERVICE of Social Security complaint on United States Attorney. Summons served on 2/23/2021 Social security answer due by 4/26/2021 unless otherwise directed by the court. Record of Submission due by 5/24/2021 unless otherwise directed by the court. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Served: US Atty 2/23/21; ORC 2/23/21; Atty General 2/26/21)(Overton, Kathleen) |
| SUMMONS ISSUED as to Andrew M. Saul, U.S. Attorney and U.S. Attorney General. Summons e-mailed to Plaintiff's Counsel for service. (Furtak, Rebecca) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE OF REASSIGNMENT from Magistrate Judge Lajuana M. Counts to District Judge Stephen R. Bough. Please note the new case number: 21-5012-CV-SW-SRB. (Melvin, Greg) |
| Filing 3 SOCIAL SECURITY COMPLAINT filed by Kathleen Overton on behalf of Jaime E. Sharrock. (Filing fee $402 receipt number IFP) filed byKathleen Overton on behalf of Jaime E. Sharrock. Service due by 4/26/2021 unless otherwise directed by the court. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Overton, Kathleen) |
Filing 2
ORAL ORDER granting #1 motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Plaintiff's counsel shall be responsible for electronically filing the Complaint within 10 days of the date of this Order. Plaintiff shall be responsible for serving process in the manner described in Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(i). Signed on January 25, 2021 by Magistrate Judge Lajuana M. Counts. This is a TEXT ONLY ENTRY. No document is attached. (Clinton, Erica)
|
| Filing 1 MOTION for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed by Kathleen Overton on behalf of Jaime E. Sharrock. Suggestions in opposition/response due by 2/5/2021 unless otherwise directed by the court. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Exhibit Complaint)(Attorney Kathleen Overton added to party Jaime E. Sharrock(pty:pla))(Overton, Kathleen) |
| NOTICE OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE ASSIGNMENT as to Plaintiff: All parties must file the Notice Regarding Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction Form consenting to or opting out of the Magistrate Judge assignment. Click # here for instructions.Plaintiff's Form due by 2/12/2021 unless otherwise directed by the court. (Furtak, Rebecca) |
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 Western 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
| Search for this case: Sharrock v. Saul | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Jaime E. Sharrock | |
| Represented By: | Kathleen Overton |
| 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: Andrew M. Saul | |
| Represented By: | OGCSSAR7 |
| 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.
