Laslie v. Colvin
Plaintiff: Paul S Laslie
Defendant: Carolyn Colvin
Case Number: 2:2015cv00213
Filed: February 11, 2015
Court: US District Court for the Western District of Washington
Office: Seattle Office
County: King
Presiding Judge: Marsha J. Pechman
Presiding Judge: Mary Alice Theiler
Nature of Suit: Supplemental Security Income
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 416
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
November 20, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 15 ORDER OF REMAND by Judge Marsha J. Pechman. Court ADOPTS the 14 Report and Recommendation and remands matter for further administrative proceedings. (PM)
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: Laslie v. Colvin
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Carolyn Colvin
Represented By: Kerry Jane Keefe(Designation Assistant US Attorney)
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 ]
Plaintiff: Paul S Laslie
Represented By: M Tha Win
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?