Jill Campbell v. Michael Astrue
| JILL CAMPBELL |
| MICHAEL J. ASTRUE |
| 11-55486 |
| March 25, 2011 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| D.I.W.C./D.I.W.W. |
Opinions
We have the following opinions for this case:
| Description |
|---|
| JILL CAMPBELL V. MICHAEL ASTRUE |
 JILL CAMPBELL V. MICHAEL ASTRUE
|
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
9025537443
Filed Order for PUBLICATION (KIM MCLANE WARDLAW, CARLOS T. BEA and ANDREW D. HURWITZ)(Dissent by Judge Wardlaw) The Appellant s motion for attorneys fees is DENIED. The Appellant s unopposed motion for filing costs in the amount of $805.00 is GRANTED. (SEE ORDER FOR FULL TEXT) [8878414]
|
Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
| Search for this case: Jill Campbell v. Michael Astrue | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff - appellant,: JILL CAMPBELL | |
| Represented By: | Andrew Thomas Koenig |
| 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 - appellee,: MICHAEL J. ASTRUE | |
| Represented By: | Marcus Kerner |
| 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.
