Sharp

Plaintiff: Delores K Sharp
Defendant: Michael J. Astrue
Case Number: 2:2009cv01841
Filed: September 3, 2009
Court: Arizona District Court
Office: Phoenix Division Office
County: Maricopa
Presiding Judge: David K Duncan
Nature of Suit: None
Cause of Action: 42:405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
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
April 30, 2010 27 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER granting 20 Motion for Attorney Fees. Plaintiff is awarded $8,577.55 pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412. Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 4/29/10.(LAD)
March 9, 2010 19 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER that Defendant's decision denying benefits is reversed. The Clerk is directed to remand the case for an award of benefits. Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 03/09/10. (ESL)

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 Arizona District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Sharp
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Delores K Sharp
Represented By: Dennis Lee Peterson
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 ]
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 [ 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?