Garcia v. Astrue

Plaintiff: Frances Garcia
Defendant: Michael J. Astrue
Case Number: 2:2009cv02039
Filed: September 29, 2009
Court: Arizona District Court
Office: Phoenix Division Office
County: Maricopa
Presiding Judge: Neil V Wake
Nature of Suit: None
Cause of Action: 42:405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
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
August 21, 2012 40 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER that Plaintiff's 31 Application for Attorney Fees Under the Equal Access to Justice Act is granted, as amended in her Reply (Doc. 39), except for fees incurred on appeal. Plaintiff is awarded attorneys' fees in the amount of $5,794.54. That the Clerk enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff in the amount of $5,794.54 for attorneys' fees against Defendant. Signed by Judge Neil V Wake on 8/21/12.(DMT)

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: Garcia v. Astrue
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Frances Garcia
Represented By: Eric Glenn Slepian
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?