Soto v. Berryhill
Plaintiff: Kimberly Soto
Defendant: Nancy A. Berryhill
Case Number: 3:2017cv02565
Filed: May 4, 2017
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of California
Office: San Francisco Office
County: Lake
Presiding Judge: Edward M. Chen
Nature of Suit: Retirement and Survivors Benefits
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
April 25, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 22 ORDER by Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley granting 14 Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment; denying 20 Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment. (ahm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/25/2018)
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 Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Soto v. Berryhill
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Kimberly Soto
Represented By: Erika Dale Bailey Drake
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: Nancy A. Berryhill
Represented By: Daniel Adam Lazar
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?