Thayn v. Astrue
Plaintiff: Todd Thayn
Defendant: Michael J. Astrue
Case Number: 2:2010cv00634
Filed: July 9, 2010
Court: US District Court for the District of Utah
Office: Central Office
County: Utah
Presiding Judge: David Sam
Nature of Suit: Supplemental Security Income
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 0405
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
March 30, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 16 MEMORANDUM DECISION that the Commissioner's decision is REVERSED and REMANDED for further consideration of the medical opinion evidence as directed by Social Security Ruling 96-2p. This court also finds that Mr. Thayn's residual functional capacity must be re-evaluated to include all impairments as directed by Social Security Ruling 96-8p. Signed by Judge David Sam on 03/29/2011. (asp)
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 Utah District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Thayn 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: Todd Thayn
Represented By: Natalie L. Bolli-Jones
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?