Britton v. Astrue
Plaintiff: Constance Britton
Defendant: Michael J Astrue
Case Number: 9:2009cv02753
Filed: October 22, 2009
Court: US District Court for the District of South Carolina
Office: Beaufort Office
County: Beaufort
Presiding Judge: Patrick Michael Duffy
Presiding Judge: Bristow Marchant
Nature of Suit: None
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
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
December 28, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 13 ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS The Court adopts the R&R of the Magistrate Judge as the order of the Court and incorporates it by reference herein. The denial of benefits is affirmed. Signed by Honorable Richard M Gergel on 12/28/2010. (jbry, )
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: Britton 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: Constance Britton
Represented By: Todd James Johnson
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?