Legal Opinion

(SS) Connolly v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, E.D. California

Decided November 5, 2019No. 1:15-cv-00718Unknown

1Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CHRISTOPHER THOMAS-TROY ) Case No.: 1:15-cv-00718-BAM CONNOLLY ) 12 ) ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR Plaintiff, ) ATTORNEYS’ FEES PURSUANT TO 42 U.S.C. 13 ) § 1383(d)(2)(B) v. ) 14 ) (Doc. No. 28) ANDREW M. SAUL,1 Commissioner of ) 15 Social Security, ) ) 16 Defendant. 17 Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s counsel’s motion for attorneys’ fees pursuant to 42 18 U.S.C. §1383(d)(2)(B). (Doc. No. 28). The Commissioner of Social Security (the “Commissioner”) 19 has filed a statement of non-opposition to the motion.…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Hearn v. BarnhartDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2003
  2. Gisbrecht v. BarnhartSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
  3. Crawford v. AstrueCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API