Singleton v. Astrue
Plaintiff: Richard Eugene Singleton
Defendant: Michael J. Astrue
Case Number: 6:2009cv03197
Filed: June 15, 2009
Court: US District Court for the Western District of Missouri
Office: Springfield Office
County: Howell
Presiding Judge: Gary A. Fenner
Nature of Suit: None
Cause of Action: 42:405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
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
October 27, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 14 ORDER granting 11 motion for attorney fees. Signed by District Judge Gary A. Fenner on 10/27/09. (Mitchell, Lisa)
September 18, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 9 ORDER granting 8 motion to reverse and remand to Commissioner. Signed by District Judge Gary A. Fenner on 9/18/09. (Mitchell, Lisa)
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: Singleton 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: Richard Eugene Singleton
Represented By: Randall Cary Nathan, Jr.
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?