Legal Opinion
Chapa v. Astrue
District Court, C.D. California
Decided April 25, 2011No. CV 09-4614-EPublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER RE: “COUNSEL’S MOTION FOR ATTORNEY FEES PURSUANT TO 42 U.S.C. § 406(b)”
CHARLES F. EICK, United States Magistrate Judge.
On December 20, 2010, counsel for Plaintiff filed “Counsel’s Notice of Motion and Motion for Attorney Fees Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 406(b), etc.” (“Motion”). On January 20, 2011, Defendant filed a response (“Defendant’s Response”). On February 10, 2011, counsel for Plaintiff filed a reply (“Reply”). Counsel for Plaintiff seeks attorney fees in the amount of $10,000, with an order to reimburse Plaintiff $4,080 from the $6,400 previously awarded as attorney fees under the…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Astrue v. RatliffSupreme Court of the United States · 2010
- Gisbrecht v. BarnhartSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
- Shalala v. SchaeferSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Bennett v. SpearSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Caminetti v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1917
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- (SS) Sanchez v. Commissioner of Social SecurityDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2025
- Ball v. Social Security AdministrationDistrict Court, E.D. Louisiana · 2019
- Camuro v. Commissioner of Social SecurityDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2023
- Martinez-Vazquez v. SaulDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2023
- O'Neil v. KijakaziDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2024