Arp v. Social Security Administration
Case Number: 8:2006cv00630
Filed: September 29, 2006
Court: US District Court for the District of Nebraska
Office: 8 Omaha Office
Presiding Judge: Richard G. Kopf
Nature of Suit: Social Security: SSID Tit. XVI
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 0405 Review of HHS Decision
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
November 18, 2008 Opinion or Order Filing 33 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - The motion for attorney fees pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 406(b) filed by Plaintiff's counsel (filing 26 ) is granted, and the amount of $16,921.75 shall be paid directly to Plaintiff's counsel from the past-due benefits that were withheld by the Social Security Administration for payment of an authorized attorney fee. Plaintiff's counsel is directed to refund to Plaintiff $1,795.62, which is the amount of attorney fees previously awarded under the EAJA. Judgment shall be entered by separate document. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Kopf. (GJG, )
October 28, 2008 Opinion or Order Filing 31 ORDER - Defendant's motion for an enlargement of time (filing 30 ) is granted, as follows: Defendant shall have until November 26, 2008, to respond to Plaintiff's motion for attorney fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b) (filing 26 ). Ordered by Judge Richard G. Kopf. (GJG, )
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 Nebraska District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Arp v. Social Security Administration
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | 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?