C.D. California· 6/2/2000
Patterson Ex Rel. Chaney v. Apfel
Citations
- 99 F. Supp. 2d 1212
- 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10511
- 2000 WL 760992
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that expenditure of 33.75 hours was reasonable after 24 conducting “a survey of several dozen cases”
- holding that “33.75 hours spent by plaintiff's 18 |}counsel” was reasonable based on “a survey of several dozen [Social Security fee] cases’’
- noting that “a survey of 27 several dozen cases in which attorney’s fees were awarded in social security 28 1 2 approved range,” and collecting cases
- noting that “a survey of several dozen cases in which attorney’s fees 16 were awarded in social security cases suggests that the 33.75 hours spent by plaintiff’s 17 counsel falls within the approved range”
- noting that “a survey of several dozen cases in which attorney’s fees were 16 awarded in social security cases suggests that the 33.75 hours spent by plaintiff’s 17 counsel falls within the approved range”
- noting that “a survey of several dozen cases in which attorney’s 20 fees were awarded in social security cases suggests that the 33.75 hours spent by 21 plaintiff’s counsel falls within the approved range”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Wistrich
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
7 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Costa v. Commissioner of Social Security AdministrationNinth Circuit· 2012-08-24· cited 343×
- Kirk v. BerryhillE.D. California· 2017-03-22· cited 24×
- Harden v. Commissioner Social Security AdministrationD. Oregon· 2007-08-02· cited 17×
- Wirth v. BarnhartE.D. Wisconsin· 2004-07-16· cited 9×
- MENTER v. AstrueD. New Jersey· 2008-08-12· cited 5×
- Black v. AstrueC.D. California· 2008-02-13· cited 1×
- McMahon v. AstrueD. Arizona· 2008-09-08
Cites
15 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Rodriquez v. BowenSixth Circuit· 1989-01-11· cited 292×
- Richard S. RUSSELL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Louis W. SULLIVAN, M.D., Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant-AppelleeNinth Circuit· 1991-04-24· cited 194×
- Pribek v. Secretary, Department of Health & Human ServicesW.D. New York· 1989-08-07· cited 147×
- Love v. ReillyNinth Circuit· 1991-02-01· cited 109×
- Ceglia v. SchweikerE.D. New York· 1983-05-24· cited 53×
- Sampson v. ChaterNinth Circuit· 1996-12-26· cited 44×
- DiGennaro v. BowenE.D. New York· 1987-08-04· cited 21×
- Vega v. SchweikerS.D. New York· 1983-02-02· cited 19×
- San Filippo v. Secretary of Health & Human ServicesE.D. New York· 1983-05-04· cited 14×
- Penrod v. ApfelD. Arizona· 1999-01-20· cited 13×
- Sorich v. ShalalaD. Nebraska· 1993-10-26· cited 9×
- Bullfrog Films, Inc. v. CattoC.D. California· 1993-03-01· cited 6×
- Spruil v. BowenM.D. Florida· 1988-07-14· cited 6×
- Afanador v. SullivanN.D. California· 1992-07-13· cited 4×
- Terry v. BowenD. Arizona· 1989-04-26· cited 2×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.