Davenport v. Commissioner of Social Security
Plaintiff: Latisha Shamond Davenport
Defendant: Commissioner of Social Security
Case Number: 2:2016cv02729
Filed: November 17, 2016
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of California
Office: Sacramento Office
County: Sacramento
Presiding Judge: Craig M. Kellison
Nature of Suit: Supplemental Security Income
Cause of Action: 42:405
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
July 11, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 28 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 7/11/2018 ORDERING that Plaintiff shall be awarded attorney's fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28:2412(d), in the amount of $6,000.00; this amount represents compensation for all legal services rendered on behalf of Plaintiff by counsel in connection with this civil action, in accordance with 28:2412(d). (Reader, L)
March 28, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 25 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 3/27/2018 GRANTING 19 Motion for Summary Judgment, DENYING 22 Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment, and REMANDING this matter for further proceedings consistent with this order. CASE CLOSED. (York, M)
August 21, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 21 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 8/18/2017 ORDERING that Defendant shall have a 14 day extension of time to 9/4/2017, to respond to Plaintiff's opening brief. (Reader, L)
June 16, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 18 STIPULATION AND ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 6/16/2017 ORDERING the plaintiff to file a Motion for Summary Judgment by 7/19/2017; MODIFYING the Court's Scheduling Order accordingly. (Michel, G.)
May 4, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 16 STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 5/4/2017 ORDERING that the time for plaintiff to file her Opening Brief is EXTENDED to 6/19/2017. (Zignago, K.)
December 13, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 4 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 12/13/16 ORDERING that Plaintiff's 2 Motion to Proceed IFP is GRANTED. The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve scheduling order in social security cases. Within 15 days from the date of this order, plaintiff shall submit to the United States Marshal a completed summons and copies of the complaint and to file a statement with the court that said documents have been submitted to the United States Marshal. The United States Marshal is directed to serve all process without prepayment of costs not later than sixty days from the date of this order. (Becknal, R)
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 California Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Davenport v. Commissioner of Social Security
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Latisha Shamond Davenport
Represented By: Jacqueline Anna Forslund
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: Commissioner of Social Security
Represented By: Chantal Jenkins
Represented By: Bobbie J. Montoya, ss
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?