Beasley v. Social Security Administration
ORDER granting 15 Motion for Attorney Fees & Expenses, & approving an EAJA award in the amount of $2,661.62. Signed by Magistrate Judge H. David Young on 9/15/2011. (jct)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
CASE NO. 3:10CV00124 HDY
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE,
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL
Now before the Court is the plaintiff’s motion for attorney’s fees and expenses pursuant to
the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412. The defendant does not oppose the
amount of the award, but urges that the award should be made to the plaintiff, not to plaintiff’s
We grant the motion, approving an EAJA award in the amount of $2,661.62. We find
nothing unreasonable about the hours of work performed or the hourly rate requested. Because the
award belongs to the plaintiff, and not her attorney, as set forth in Astrue v. Ratliff, 130 S. Ct. 2521
(2010), the Department of Treasury shall issue payment of this award by check made payable to the
plaintiff, in care of her attorney, Mr. Anthoney Bartels, and shall mail the check to Bartels at his
Jonesboro, Arkansas, address.1
The general procedure the Commissioner now follows in effectuating court orders
awarding EAJA fees to the claimant is as follows: The Commissioner certifies the order to the
Department of the Treasury for payment. Afterward, the Department of Treasury issues payment
by check to the order of the plaintiff, in care of his attorney, and mails the check to the plaintiff’s
IT IS SO ORDERED this 15
day of September, 2011.
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
attorney. See Chapman v. Astrue, 3:10CV00047 HDY, Document 20.
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?