Compton v. Astrue
| Dena R Compton |
| Michael J. Astrue |
| 4:2012cv00267 |
| November 19, 2012 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina |
| Eastern Division Office |
| CARTERET |
| James C. Dever |
| Social Security: SSID Tit. XVI |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 416 Denial of Social Security Benefits |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
24
ORDER granting 22 Motion for Voluntary Dismissal. Counsel should read the order in its entirety for critical information. Signed by Chief Judge James C. Dever III on 4/16/2013. (Sawyer, D.)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
- 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: Compton 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: Dena R Compton | |
| Represented By: | Janet M. Lyles |
| 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 | |
| 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.
