Dotson v. Social Security Administration
||Brianna A. Dotson
||Social Security Administration
||May 26, 2016
||US District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee
||E. Clifton Knowles
||William J. Haynes
|Nature of Suit:
||Supplemental Security Income
|Cause of Action:
||42 U.S.C. § 405
|Jury Demanded By:
Access additional case information on PACER
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|September 12, 2017
ORDER: Before the court is plaintiff Brianna Dotson's objection (Doc. 25) to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (R&R) (Doc. 22), recommending that plaintiff's motion for judgment on the administrative record (Doc. 1 3) be DENIED and that the Social Security Commissioner's denial of benefits be AFFIRMED. Following a de novo review pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), and as provided in the memorandum entered contemporaneously herewith, plaintiff 039;s objection (Doc. 25) is OVERRULED, and the court ACCEPTS and ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge's R&R (Doc. 22) as the Courts findings of fact and conclusions of law. This order constitutes final judgment in this action for purposes of Rule 58, Fed. R. Civ. P. Signed by District Judge Aleta A. Trauger on 9/12/2017. (jw)
|March 29, 2017
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: For the reasons explained below, the undersigned RECOMMENDS that plaintiff's motion for judgment on the administrative record (Doc. 13) be DENIED, and the Commissioner's decision AFFIRMED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Joe Brown on 3/29/2017. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(jw)
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 Tennessee Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
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?