Iames v. Social Security Administration Commissioner
Filing
23
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER; the Plaintiff is awarded the sum of $5,837.16 for attorney's fees pursuant to the EAJA, 28 U.S.C. § 2412. Signed by Honorable P. K. Holmes, III on October 22, 2018. (lw)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
FORT SMITH DIVISION
KIMBERLEY D. IAMES
v.
PLAINTIFF
CIVIL NO. 2:17-cv-2138-PKH
NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting Commissioner
Social Security Administration
DEFENDANT
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Pending now before this Court is Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorney Fees Under the Equal
Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”). (ECF Nos. 20, 21). The Defendant has filed a response, and the
matter is now ripe for resolution. (ECF No. 22).
On September 26, 2018, Plaintiff filed a motion for attorney’s fees and costs under 28
U.S.C. § 2412, the Equal Access to Justice Act (hereinafter “EAJA”), requesting $5,908.30
representing a total of 20.05 attorney hours in 2017 at an hourly rate of $192.00, 2.20 attorney
hours in 2018 at an hourly rate of $196.00, and 21.70 paralegal hours at an hourly rate of $75.00.
(ECF No. 20). On September 27, 2018, the Defendant filed a response objecting to Plaintiff’s
request for compensation for the filing of a motion for extension of time. (ECF No. 22).
It is the opinion of the undersigned that the Plaintiff is entitled to a fee award in this case,
as she is the prevailing party, the government’s decision to deny benefits was not “substantially
justified,” the hourly rate requested for both attorney and paralegal hours does not exceed the CPI
for either year in question, and the time asserted to have been spent in the representation of the
Plaintiff before the district court is reasonable. See Jackson v. Bowen, 807 F.2d 127, 128 (8th Cir.
1986) (burden is on the Commissioner to show substantial justification for the government’s denial
of benefits); Johnson v. Sullivan, 919 F.2d 503 (8th Cir. 1990) (the hourly rate may be increased
when there is “uncontested proof of an increase in the cost of living sufficient to justify hourly
attorney’s fees of more than $75.00 an hour); and, Allen v. Heckler, 588 F.Supp. 1247 (W.D.N.Y.
1984) (in determining reasonableness, court looks at time and labor required; the difficulty of
questions involved; the skill required to handle the problems presented; the attorney’s experience,
ability, and reputation; the benefits resulting to the client from the services; the customary fee for
similar services; the contingency or certainty of compensation; the results obtained; and, the
amount involved). The Court, however, agrees with the Defendant’s objection to the 0.183
attorney hours requested in 2017 for the completion of the motion for extension of time.
Accordingly, the undersigned finds that the Plaintiff is entitled to an attorney’s fee award under
EAJA in the amount of $5,837.16 (representing 19.87 attorney hours in 2017 at $192.00 + 2.20
attorney hours in 2018 at $196.00 + 21.70 paralegal hours at $75.00).
Pursuant to Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586, 596 (2010), however, the EAJA fee award
should be made payable to Plaintiff. Thus, as a matter of practice, an EAJA fee made payable to
Plaintiff may properly be mailed to Plaintiff’s counsel.
The parties are reminded that, in order to prevent double recovery by counsel for the
Plaintiff, the award herein under the EAJA will be taken into account at such time as a reasonable
fee is determined pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 406.
IV.
Conclusion:
Accordingly, the Plaintiff is awarded the sum of $5,837.16 for attorney’s fees pursuant to
the EAJA, 28 U.S.C. § 2412.
Dated this 22nd day of October, 2018.
/s/ P. K. Holmes, III
P. K. HOLMES, III
CHIEF U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE
2
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?