Rutledge v. Colvin
Filing
22
STIPULATION AND ORDER RE: ATTORNEY'S FEES AND COSTS re 21 . STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER filed by Bernadette Rutledge, Nancy A. Berryhill. Motions terminated: 20 First MOTION for Attorney Fees filed by Bernadette Rutledge, 21 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER filed by Bernadette Rutledge, Nancy A. Berryhill. Signed by Magistrate Judge Kandis A. Westmore on 10/17/17. (sisS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/18/2017)
1
2
3
4
CHARLES BRUCE, 272772
HOMELESS ACTION CENTER
3126 Shattuck Avenue
Berkeley, CA 94705
Phone: (510) 540-0878 x 324
Fax: (510) 540-0403
cbruce@homelessactioncenter.org
5
Attorney for Plaintiff
6
7
8
9
10
11
BEN A. PORTER
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
160 Spear Street, Suite 800
San Francisco, CA 94105
Phone: (415) 977-8979
Fax: (415) 744-0134
Ben.Porter@ssa.gov
Attorney for Defendant
12
13
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
14
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
15
16
BERNADETTE RUTLEDGE,
17
18
19
20
21
Plaintiff,
v.
NANCY A. BERRYHILL,
Acting Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
CIVIL NO. 4:16-CV-01689-KAW
STIPULATION TO PLAINTIFF’S AWARD
OF ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS AND
PROPOSED ORDER
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties, through their undersigned
counsel, subject to the approval of the Court, that Plaintiff’s counsel, as Plaintiff’s assignee, be
awarded attorney fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) in the amount of SIX
THOUSAND DOLLARS ($6000.00). 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).
Order re EAJA fees – 4:16-cv-01689-KAW
1
This stipulation constitutes a compromise settlement of Plaintiff's request for EAJA
2
attorney fees, and does not constitute an admission of liability on the part of Defendant under
3
the EAJA. Payment of six thousand dollars ($6000.00) in EAJA attorney fees shall constitute
4
a complete release from and bar to any and all claims Plaintiff may have relating to EAJA fees,
5
expenses, and/or costs in connection with this action.
6
After this Court issues an order for EAJA fees to Plaintiff, the Commissioner will
7
consider the matter of Plaintiff’s assignment of EAJA fees to Plaintiff’s attorney. The ability
8
to honor the assignment will depend on whether the fees are subject to any offset allowed
9
under the United States Department of the Treasury’s Offset Program and the Commissioner
10
will determine whether the fees are subject to an offset. See Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586,
11
598 (2010). Any payment shall be made payable to Plaintiff, but if the Department of the
12
Treasury determines that Plaintiff does not owe a Federal debt, then the Commissioner shall
13
cause the payment of fees and costs to be made directly to Plaintiff’s counsel pursuant to the
14
assignment executed by Ms. Rutledge (attached).
15
This award is without prejudice to the rights of Plaintiff’s counsel to seek Social
16
Security Act attorney fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b), subject to the savings clause provisions of
17
the EAJA.
18
19
Dated: October 17, 2017
20
/s/ Charles Bruce
CHARLES BRUCE
Attorney for Plaintiff Bernadette Rutledge
21
22
23
24
Dated: October 17, 2017
25
By:
26
27
/s/*Ben A. Porter
BEN A. PORTER
Special Assistant United States Attorney
* by email authorization 10/16/2017
28
Attorneys for Defendant
Order re EAJA fees – 4:16-cv-01689-KAW
1
2
Based upon the parties’ Stipulation for the Award and Payment of Equal Access to Justice Act
3
Fees And Costs, IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff shall be awarded attorney fees under the EAJA
4
in the amount of six thousand dollars and zero cents ($6000.00), as authorized by 28 U.S.C. §§
5
1920, 2412(d), subject to the terms of the above-referenced Stipulation.
6
7
8
9
Dated: 10/18/17
10
11
THE HONORABLE KANDIS A. WESTMORE
United States Magistrate Judge
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Order re EAJA fees – 4:16-cv-01689-KAW
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?