Davis-Farley v. Social Security Administration
Plaintiff: Tammy Sue Davis-Farley
Defendant: Social Security Administration
Case Number: 6:2016cv00009
Filed: January 8, 2016
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Oklahoma
Office: Muskogee Office
County: Sequoyah
Presiding Judge: Kimberly E. West
Presiding Judge: Frank H. Seay
Nature of Suit: Supplemental Security Income
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 ORDER by Judge Ronald A. White : Affirming and adopting 20 the Report and Recommendation which reverses and remands the decision of the ALJ. (acg, Deputy Clerk)
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 Oklahoma Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Davis-Farley v. Social Security Administration
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Tammy Sue Davis-Farley
Represented By: David K. Harp
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: Social Security Administration
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?