Ohmer v. Colvin
Plaintiff: Stacy Nichole Ohmer
Defendant: Carolyn W Colvin
Case Number: 4:2014cv02137
Filed: June 6, 2014
Court: US District Court for the District of Arizona
Office: Tucson Division Office
County: Pima
Presiding Judge: Bernardo P Velasco
Nature of Suit: Disability Insurance
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 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
October 31, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 25 ORDER granting 22 "Plaintiff's Motion and Notice of Motion for Approval of Attorney's Fees under 42 U.S.C. §406(b) of the Social Security Act". The Court hereby AWARDS Plaintiff's counsel $10,700.00 in attorney's fees. Signed by Magistrate Judge Bernardo P Velasco on 10/30/2017. (See Order for complete details) (DPS)
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: Ohmer v. Colvin
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Stacy Nichole Ohmer
Represented By: Tye Sherman Smith
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: Carolyn W Colvin
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?