Carlsen v. Colvin

Defendant: Carolyn W. Colvin
Plaintiff: Charles Carlsen
Case Number: 1:2013cv01164
Filed: March 5, 2013
Court: New York Eastern District Court
Office: Brooklyn Office
Presiding Judge: Brian M. Cogan
Nature of Suit: Social Security: SSID Tit. XVI
Cause of Action: 42:405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
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
September 11, 2014 17 Opinion or Order of the Court MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting 10 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; denying 12 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; This action is REMANDED for further proceedings consistent with this Memorandum & Order. The Clerk of Court is directed to mark this matter CLOSED. So Ordered by Judge Joanna Seybert on 9/11/2014. C/ECF (Valle, Christine)

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 New York Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Carlsen v. Colvin
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Carolyn W. Colvin
Represented By: Kathleen Anne Mahoney
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Charles Carlsen
Represented By: Charles E. Binder
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 [ 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.