Sorensen v. Berryhill
Plaintiff: Christie Sorensen
Defendant: Nancy A. Berryhill
Case Number: 2:2018cv00397
Filed: May 21, 2018
Court: US District Court for the District of Utah
Office: Central Office
County: Salt Lake
Presiding Judge: Paul M. Warner
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
September 12, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 28 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: Having carefully considered 27 Judge Romero's Report and Recommendation, the court finds no clear error. The court therefore ADOPTS Judge Romero's Report and Recommendation and DENIES Plaintiff's appeal. Case Closed. Signed by Judge Robert J. Shelby on 9/12/19. (dla)
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: Sorensen v. Berryhill
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Christie Sorensen
Represented By: Loren M. Lambert
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: Nancy A. Berryhill
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?