Freeman v. Astrue

Freeman v. Astrue

Plaintiff:	Connie Frances Freeman
Defendant:	Michael J. Astrue
Case Number:	3:2010cv00357
Filed:	March 18, 2010
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia
Office:	Huntington Office
Presiding Judge:	Robert C. Chambers
Presiding Judge:	Maurice G. Taylor
Presiding Judge:	Maurice G. Taylor, Jr.
Nature of Suit:	Social Security: SSID Tit. XVI
Cause of Action:	42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
May 13, 2011	Filing 11 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER denying Plaintiff's 7 MOTION to Remand To Commissioner of Social Security; Grants Defendant's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, Affirms the decision of the Commissioner, and Dismisses this action from the docket of the Court, consistent with the findings and recommendation. Signed by Judge Robert C. Chambers on 5/13/2011. (cc: attys; any unrepresented party) (skm)
April 19, 2011	Filing 10 PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS the Magistrate Judge respectfully Proposes that the United States District Judge confirm and accept the findings herein and Recommends that the District Court Deny Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment on the Plea dings; Grant Defendant's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; Affirm the final decision of the Commissioner, and Dismisses this action from the docket of the Court; Parties shall have 14 days within which to file with the Clerk any written objections. Signed by Magistrate Judge Cheryl A. Eifert on 4/19/2011. (cc: attys; any unrepresented party) (skm)

Date Filed

Document Text

May 13, 2011

Filing 11 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER denying Plaintiff's 7 MOTION to Remand To Commissioner of Social Security; Grants Defendant's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, Affirms the decision of the Commissioner, and Dismisses this action from the docket of the Court, consistent with the findings and recommendation. Signed by Judge Robert C. Chambers on 5/13/2011. (cc: attys; any unrepresented party) (skm)

April 19, 2011

Filing 10 PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS the Magistrate Judge respectfully Proposes that the United States District Judge confirm and accept the findings herein and Recommends that the District Court Deny Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment on the Plea dings; Grant Defendant's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; Affirm the final decision of the Commissioner, and Dismisses this action from the docket of the Court; Parties shall have 14 days within which to file with the Clerk any written objections. Signed by Magistrate Judge Cheryl A. Eifert on 4/19/2011. (cc: attys; any unrepresented party) (skm)

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 West Virginia Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Freeman 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: Connie Frances Freeman
Represented By:	Thomas H. Peyton
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
Represented By:	Michael McGaughran
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?