James v. Astrue
Plaintiff: Sharon James
Defendant: Michael J. Astrue
Case Number: 7:2009cv00015
Filed: February 17, 2009
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina
Office: Social Security: SSID Tit. XVI Office
County: ONSLOW
Presiding Judge: Louise Wood Flanagan
Presiding Judge:
Nature of Suit: None
Cause of Action: U.S. Government Defendant
Jury Demanded By: 42:405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
December 11, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 26 ORDER granting 21 Motion for Judgment; denying 23 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings;and, adopting 25 Memorandum and Recommendations. Signed by Chief Judge Louise Wood Flanagan on 12/11/09. Copies served electronically. (Baker, C.)
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 North Carolina Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: James 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: Sharon James
Represented By: Diane S. Griffin
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.


Why Is My Information Online?