Barton v. Berryhill
Plaintiff: Herman Lee Barton, Jr
Defendant: Nancy A Berryhill
Case Number: 2:2017cv00609
Filed: April 14, 2017
Court: US District Court for the Western District of Washington
Office: Seattle Office
County: Whatcom
Presiding Judge: David W. Christel
Nature of Suit: Supplemental Security Income
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
November 15, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 24 ORDER granting 17 Motion to Dismiss signed by Judge David W. Christel. (A copy of the Order mailed to Plaintiff via USPS.)(SH)
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 Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Barton 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: Herman Lee Barton, Jr
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: Brett Edward Eckelberg(Designation Assistant US Attorney)
Represented By: Kerry Jane Keefe(Designation Assistant US Attorney)
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?