Campbell v. Commissioner of Social Security
Plaintiff: Delana M. Campbell
Defendant: Commissioner of Social Security
Case Number: 3:2015cv00363
Filed: October 7, 2015
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio
Office: Dayton Office
County: MONTGOMERY
Presiding Judge: Sharon L. Ovington
Presiding Judge: Walter H. Rice
Nature of Suit: Disability Insurance
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 405
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
March 29, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 21 DECISION AND ENTRY - IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT: 1. The Parties' Joint Stipulation for an Award of Attorney's Fees under the EAJA (Doc. # 20 ) is accepted and the Commissioner shall pay Plaintiff's attorney fees, costs, and exp enses in the total amount of $6,800.00; 2. Counsel for the parties shall verify, within thirty days of this Decision and Entry, whether or not Plaintiff owes a pre-existing debt to the United States subject to offset. If no such pre-existing debt exists, Defendant shall pay the EAJA award directly to Plaintiff's cousel pursuant to the EAJA assisngment signed by Plaintiff and counsel; and 3. The case remains terminated on the docket of this Court. Signed by Judge Walter H. Rice on 3/28/2017. (srb)
December 30, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 18 DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING IN THEIR ENTIRETY REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES CHIEF MAGISTRATE JUDGE (DOC. # 17 ); MOTION TO REMAND (DOC. # 12 ) OF DEFENDANT CAROLYN W. COLVIN, ACTING COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, IS SUSTAINED IN PART AND OVERRULED IN PART; JUDGMENT TO BE ENTERED IN FAVOR OF PLAINTIFF DELANA M. CAMPBELL AND AGAINST THE DEFENDANT COMMISSIONER, REVERSING THE DEFENDANT COMMISSIONER'S DECISION THAT PLAINTIFF WAS NOT DISABLED AND, THEREFORE, NOT ENTITLED TO BENEFI TS UNDER THE SOCIAL SECURITY ACT, AND REMANDING THE CAPTIONED CAUSE TO THE DEFENDANT COMMISSIONER, PURSUANT TO THE FOURTH SENTENCE OF 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), FOR IMMEDIATE PAYMENT OF BENEFITS;TERMINATION ENTRY. Signed by Judge Walter H. Rice on 12/29/16. (kma)
November 7, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 17 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: 1) 12 The Commissioner's Motion to Remand be GRANTED, in part, as to the requested remand to the Social Security Administration, and DENIED, in part, as to the request for further administrative proceedings; 2) the Commissioner's non-disability finding be reversed; 3) This matter be remanded to the Social Security Administration for payment of benefits regarding Plaintiff Delana M. Campbell's applications for Disability Insurance Benefits and Supplemental Security Income; and 4) The case be terminated on the docket of this Court. Objections to R&R due by 11/25/2016. Signed by Chief Magistrate Judge Sharon L. Ovington on 11-7-16. (mcm)
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 Ohio Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Campbell v. Commissioner of Social Security
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Delana M. Campbell
Represented By: Gary Marc Blumenthal
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: Commissioner of Social Security
Represented By: John J. Stark
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?