Ohmer v. Colvin
Stacy Nichole Ohmer |
Carolyn W Colvin |
4:2014cv02137 |
June 6, 2014 |
US District Court for the District of Arizona |
Tucson Division Office |
Pima |
Bernardo P Velasco |
Disability Insurance |
42 U.S.C. ยง 405 |
None |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
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) |
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.