Hyde v. Colvin
Plaintiff: Robert Hyde
Defendant: Carolyn W Colvin
Case Number: 1:2015cv03067
Filed: May 6, 2015
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Washington
Office: Yakima Office
County: Kittitas
Presiding Judge: Fred Van Sickle
Nature of Suit: Social Security: DIWC/DIWW
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
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
May 4, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 35 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO GRANT PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR EAJA ATTORNEY'S FEES. Signed by Senior Judge Fred Van Sickle. (VR, Courtroom Deputy)
August 25, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 27 JUDGMENT in favor of Robert Hyde against Carolyn W Colvin. (VR, Courtroom Deputy)
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 Washington Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Hyde v. Colvin
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Robert Hyde
Represented By: D James Tree
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: Carolyn W Colvin
Represented By: Pamela Jean DeRusha
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?