Harrington v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 24

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 6/30/2014 ORDERING that Plaintiff is awarded attorney fees and expenses in the amount of FIVE THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED DOLLARS ($5,800.00) under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), and costs in the amount of THREE HUNDRED FIFTY DOLLARS ($350.00) under 28 U.S.C. § 1920. (Zignago, K.)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 BENJAMIN B. WAGNER United States Attorney DONNA L. CALVERT Regional Chief Counsel, Region IX Social Security Administration BRENDA M. PULLIN Special Assistant United States Attorney 160 Spear Street, Suite 800 San Francisco, California 94105 Telephone: (415) 977-8975 Facsimile: (415) 744-0134 E-Mail: Brenda.Pullin@ssa.gov Attorneys for Defendant 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 SACRAMENTO DIVISION 12 13 14 15 16 MICHELLE HARRINGTON, Plaintiff, vs. CAROLYN W. COLVIN Acting Commissioner of Social Security, 17 18 Defendant. CASE NO. 2:13-CV-52-AC ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR THE AWARD OF ATTORNEY FEES PURSUANT TO THE EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), AND COSTS PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1920 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties through their undersigned counsel, subject to the approval of the Court, that Plaintiff be awarded attorney fees and expenses in the amount of FIVE THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED DOLLARS ($5,800.00) under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), and costs in the amount of THREE HUNDRED FIFTY DOLLARS ($350.00) under 28 U.S.C. § 1920. This amount represents compensation for all legal services rendered on behalf of Plaintiff by counsel in connection with this civil action, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. §§ 1920; 2412(d). 27 28 1 1 After the Court issues an order for EAJA fees and costs to Plaintiff, the government will 2 consider the matter of Plaintiff’s assignment of EAJA fees and costs to Plaintiff’s attorney. 3 Pursuant to Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586, 598, 130 S.Ct. 2521, 177 L.Ed.2d 91 (2010), the 4 ability to honor the assignment will depend on whether the fees and costs are subject to any 5 offset allowed under the United States Department of the Treasury’s Offset Program. After the 6 order for EAJA fees and costs is entered, the government will determine whether they are subject 7 to any offset. 8 Fees and costs shall be made payable to Plaintiff, but if the Department of the Treasury 9 determines that Plaintiff does not owe a federal debt, then the government shall cause the 10 payment of fees, expenses and costs to be made directly to Rick Peasley, pursuant to the 11 assignment executed by Plaintiff. Any payments made shall be delivered to Plaintiff’s counsel. 12 This stipulation constitutes a compromise settlement of Plaintiff’s request for EAJA 13 attorney fees, expenses, and costs, and does not constitute an admission of liability on the part of 14 Defendant under the EAJA or otherwise. Payment of the agreed amount shall constitute a 15 complete release from, and bar to, any and all claims that Plaintiff and/or Plaintiff’s counsel may 16 have relating to EAJA attorney fees, expenses, and costs in connection with this action. 17 This award is without prejudice to the rights of Plaintiff’s counsel to seek Social Security 18 Act attorney fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b), subject to the savings clause provisions of the EAJA. 19 20 Respectfully submitted, Dated: June 26, 2014 By: 21 22 /s/ Rick Peasley* RICK PEASLEY *By email authorization on June 26, 2014 Attorney for Plaintiff 23 BENJAMIN B. WAGNER United States Attorney 24 25 26 27 Dated: June 25, 2014 By: /s/ Brenda M. Pullin BRENDA M. PULLIN Special Assistant United States Attorney Attorneys for Defendant 28 2 1 ORDER 2 Pursuant to the parties’ stipulation, it is so ordered. 3 4 5 Dated: June 30, 2014 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3

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?