Dixon v. Colvin

Defendant: Carolyn W. Colvin
Plaintiff: Melissa Denise Dixon
Case Number: 2:2014cv00578
Filed: April 18, 2014
Court: Washington Western District Court
Office: Seattle Office
County: King
Referring Judge: James P. Donohue
Presiding Judge: Marsha J. Pechman
Nature of Suit: Supplemental Security Income
Cause of Action: 42:405
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
January 26, 2015 22 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER DISMISSING CASE AND ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 21 Report and Recommendations, by Judge Marsha J. Pechman. (MD)

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 Washington Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Dixon v. Colvin
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Carolyn W. Colvin
Represented By: Kerry Jane Keefe(Designation Retained)
Represented By: John Christopher LaMont
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 ]
Plaintiff: Melissa Denise Dixon
Represented By: Richard Alan Baum
Represented By: Paul B Eaglin(Designation Admission Pro Hac Vice)
Represented By: Kenneth Isserlis
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.