Wydner v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 31

ORDER signed by Chief District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 1/16/2024 ORDERING Plaintiff filed timely objections requesting the court direct payment directly to counsel, as she previously had agreed, "provided plaintiff has no federal debt that requires offset." Objections at 2, ECF No. 30 ; Walker Decl. 3, ECF No. 26 . The court sustains the objection and awards fees in the amount of $7,689.83, payable directly to counsel, Jared Walker, by the Commissioner, provided plaintiff has no federal debt that requires offset. (Reader, L)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 12 Dawn Wydner, real party in interest on behalf of Gregory J. Wydner, 15 v. Martin O’Malley, Commissioner of Social Security, 16 Defendants. 17 18 ORDER Plaintiff, 13 14 No. 2:16-cv-00458-KJM-DMC The Magistrate Judge previously granted plaintiff’s unopposed motion for attorneys’ fees 19 in this action under the Social Security Act.1 ECF No. 29. The court awarded fees “in the 20 amount of $7,689.83, payable directly to plaintiff by the Commissioner.” Id. Plaintiff filed 21 timely objections requesting the court direct payment directly to counsel, as she previously had 22 agreed, “provided plaintiff has no federal debt that requires offset.” Objections at 2, ECF No. 30; 23 Walker Decl. ¶ 3, ECF No. 26. The court sustains the objection and awards fees in the amount of 24 $7,689.83, payable directly to counsel, Jared Walker, by the Commissioner, provided plaintiff has 25 no federal debt that requires offset. See, e.g., Fagan v. Berryhill, No. 16-02051, 2018 U.S. Dist. 1 The current Commissioner of Social Security is substituted automatically as the defendant in this action. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 25(d). 1 1 LEXIS 181992, at *9 (E.D. Cal. Oct. 23, 2018) (ordering similarly and collecting similar 2 decisions). 3 4 5 IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: January 16, 2024. 6 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?