Barnett v. Colvin

Plaintiff: Jill M. Barnett
Defendant: Carolyn W. Colvin
Case Number: 4:2013cv00375
Filed: April 16, 2013
Court: Missouri Western District Court
Office: Kansas City Office
County: Bates
Presiding Judge: Fernando J. Gaitan
Nature of Suit: Social Security: DIWC/DIWW
Cause of Action: 42:205 Denial Social Security Benefits
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 8, 2015 33 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER granting 27 plaintiff's motion for attorney fees under Section 406(b). Counsel Cathleen Shine shall be awarded $10,234.50 in attorney's fees. Ms. Shine is directed to refund to plaintiff, Jill Barnett, the amount of $7,500.00, representing the EAJA fees previously awarded to counsel. Signed on 4/8/15 by District Judge Fernando J. Gaitan, Jr. (Enss, Rhonda)

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 Missouri Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Barnett v. Colvin
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Jill M. Barnett
Represented By: Cathleen A Shine
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Carolyn W. Colvin
Represented By: OGCSSAR7
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 [ 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.