Nabis-Smith v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration
Plaintiff: Kay Ann Nabis-Smith
Defendant: Commissioner Social Security Administration
Case Number: 6:2013cv01427
Filed: August 15, 2013
Court: US District Court for the District of Oregon
Office: Eugene (6) Office
Presiding Judge: Michael W. Mosman
Nature of Suit: Social Security: DIWC/DIWW
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1383 Review of HHS Decision
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
November 9, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 30 OPINION AND ORDER . The Commissioner's decision is AFFIRMED and this action is DISMISSED with prejudice. Signed on 11/9/2015 by Magistrate Judge John Jelderks. (jtj)
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 Oregon District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Nabis-Smith v. Commissioner, 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 ]
Defendant: Commissioner Social Security Administration
Represented By: Adrian L. Brown
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 ]
Plaintiff: Kay Ann Nabis-Smith
Represented By: Brent Wells
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?