Davis v. Astrue
Plaintiff: Dorothy Davis
Defendant: Michael J. Astrue
Case Number: 6:2008cv03391
Filed: October 30, 2008
Court: US District Court for the Western District of Missouri
Office: Social Security: DIWC/DIWW Office
County: Douglas
Presiding Judge: James C. England
Nature of Suit: None
Cause of Action: U.S. Government Defendant
Jury Demanded By: 42:405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
February 3, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 17 ORDER granting pltf's motion for judgment on the pleadings; matter remanded to Commissioner for calculation and award of benefits. Signed on 2/3/10 by Magistrate Judge James C. England. (Elayer, Glenda)
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 this case: Davis v. Astrue
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Dorothy Davis
Represented By: Daniel A. Parmele
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: Michael J. Astrue
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.


Why Is My Information Online?