Wampler v. Colvin

Plaintiff: Carl Wampler
Defendant: Carolyn W Colvin
Case Number: 1:2014cv00070
Filed: April 25, 2014
Court: Texas Northern District Court
Office: Abilene Office
County: Stephens
Presiding Judge: E. Scott Frost
Nature of Suit: Supplemental Security Income
Cause of Action: 42:402
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
July 16, 2015 16 Opinion or Order of the Court Order Adopting Findings and Recommendations and Dismissing Case. It is, therefore, ORDERED that the findings and conclusions in the Report and Recommendation are hereby ADOPTED as the findings and conclusions of the Court and that the above-styled and -numbered cause is hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. (Ordered by Judge Sam R Cummings on 7/16/2015) (mmg)

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 Texas Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Wampler v. Colvin
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Carl Wampler
Represented By: Miles L Mitzner
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Carolyn W Colvin
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 [ 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?