Hill v. Astrue
Plaintiff: Billy J Hill
Defendant: Michael J Astrue
Case Number: 6:2008cv03669
Filed: November 3, 2008
Court: US District Court for the District of South Carolina
Office: Social Security: DIWC/DIWW Office
County: Hampton
Presiding Judge: William M Catoe
Presiding Judge: Patrick Michael Duffy
Nature of Suit: None
Cause of Action: U.S. Government Defendant
Jury Demanded By: 42:405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
October 2, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 27 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS of Magistrate Judge Catoe and ordering that Commissioner's decision be reversed under sentence four of 42 USC 405(g) and remanded for further proceedings. Signed by Honorable Patrick Michael Duffy on 10/2/09. (chub, )
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 South Carolina District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Hill 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: Billy J Hill
Represented By: Margaret League Boylston
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?