Boggs v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 24

ORDER granting 23 Motion for Attorney Fees. See Order for details. Signed by Magistrate Judge Anthony E. Porcelli on 6/17/2019. (VIV)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION JEFFREY BOGGS, Plaintiff, v. Case No. 8:18-cv-148-AEP NANCY A. BERRYHILL, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant. / ORDER This cause comes before the Court on Plaintiff’s Petition for Attorney Fees (Doc. 23). By the motion, Plaintiff seeks attorney’s fees in the amount of $3,788.04 pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412. On March 25, 2019, this Court entered an Order reversing and remanding the case under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) to the Commissioner for further administrative proceedings (Doc. 21). The Clerk entered judgment in favor of Plaintiff thereafter (Doc. 22). Accordingly, as the prevailing party, Plaintiff now requests an award of fees. See 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(1)(A). The Commissioner does not oppose the requested relief (Doc. 23). After issuance of an order awarding EAJA fees, however, the United States Department of the Treasury will determine whether Plaintiff owes a debt to the government. If Plaintiff has no discernable federal debt, the government will accept Plaintiff’s assignment of EAJA fees (Doc. 23-2) and pay the fees directly to Plaintiff’s counsel. For the reasons set out in Plaintiff’s motion, therefore, it is hereby ORDERED: 1. Plaintiff’s Petition for Attorney Fees (Doc. 23) is GRANTED. 2. Plaintiff is awarded fees in the amount of $3,788.04. Unless the Department of Treasury determines that Plaintiff owes a federal debt, the government must pay the fees to Plaintiff’s counsel in accordance with Plaintiff’s assignment of fees. DONE AND ORDERED in Tampa, Florida, on this 17th day of June, 2019. cc: Counsel of Record 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?