Roundtree v. Commissioner of Social Security
Filing
34
ORDER granting 33 Plaintiff's Uncontested Petition for Attorney Fees. Signed by Magistrate Judge Sean P. Flynn on 12/3/2019. (CKR)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TAMPA DIVISION
DARLENE ROUNDTREE,
Plaintiff,
v.
Case No. 8:18-cv-1524-T-SPF
ANDREW M. SAUL,
Commissioner of the Social
Security Administration, 1
Defendant.
/
ORDER
This cause comes before the Court upon Plaintiff’s Uncontested Petition for
Attorney Fees (Doc. 33), pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”). On
September 25, 2019, this Court entered an Order reversing and remanding the case to the
Commissioner for further administrative proceedings (Doc. 31). The Clerk then entered
judgment in favor of Plaintiff (Doc. 32). As the prevailing party, Plaintiff now requests
an award of attorney’s fees in the amount of $5,765.95. See 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(1)(A); cf.
Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292, 300-02 (1993) (concluding that a party who wins a
sentence-four remand order under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) is a prevailing party).
In order for the Plaintiff to be awarded fees under EAJA, the following five
conditions must be established: (1) Plaintiff must file a timely application for attorney’s
1
Andrew M. Saul became Commissioner of Social Security on June 17, 2019. Pursuant
to Rule 25(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Mr. Saul is substituted for Acting
Commissioner Nancy A. Berryhill as Defendant in this suit.
fees; (2) Plaintiff’s net worth must have been less than $2 million at the time the Complaint
was filed; (3) Plaintiff must be the prevailing party in a non-tort suit involving the United
States; (4) the position of the United States must not have been substantially justified; and
(5) there must be no special circumstances which would make the award unjust. 28 U.S.C.
§ 2412(d); Commissioner, INS v. Jean, 496 U.S. 154, 158 (1990); McCullough v. Astrue, 565
F. Supp. 2d 1327, 1330 (M.D. Fla. 2008).
Here, the Commissioner does not dispute that the Plaintiff has meet all the above
described conditions. (See Doc. 33). Further, as Plaintiff contends, the position of the
United States was not substantially justified, and no special circumstances exist which
would make an award of attorney’s fees unjust in this instance.
See 28 U.S.C. §
2412(d)(1)(A). Therefore, Plaintiff’s has established her entitlement to attorney’s fees.
With respect to the amount of attorney’s fees, EAJA fees are decided under the
“lodestar” method by determining the number of hours reasonably expended on the
matter multiplied by a reasonable hourly rate. Jean v. Nelson, 863 F.2d 759, 773 (11th
Cir.1988), aff'd 496 U.S. 154 (1990). The resulting fee carries a strong presumption that it
is the reasonable fee. City of Burlington v. Dague, 505 U.S. 557, 562 (1992).
By her motion, Plaintiff seeks an award of attorney’s fees in the amount of
$5,765.95. The amount is based on 29.3 hours expended by her attorney on this matter
in 2018 and 2019 at a rate of $196.79 per hour. (Doc. 33 at 2). Based on the undersigned’s
own knowledge and experience, the Court concludes that both the hourly rate and the
2
number of hours requested are fair and reasonable. Norman v. Hous. Auth. of City of
Montgomery, 836 F.2d 1292, 1303 (11th Cir. 1988) (stating that “[t]he court, either trial or
appellate, is itself an expert on the question and may consider its own knowledge and
experience concerning reasonable and proper fees and may form an independent
judgment either with or without the aid of witnesses as to value”)(quotation omitted).
Therefore, Plaintiff is awarded attorney’s fees in the amount of $5,765.95.
If Plaintiff has no discernable federal debt, the government will accept Plaintiff’s
assignment of EAJA fees (Doc. 33-2) and pay the fees directly to Plaintiff’s counsel. See
Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586, 597 (2010) (discussing the government’s practice to make
direct payment of fees to attorneys only in cases where “the plaintiff does not owe a debt
to the government and assigns the right to receive the fees to the attorney”).
For the reasons set out in Plaintiff’s motion, therefore, it is hereby
ORDERED:
1. Plaintiff’s Uncontested Petition for Attorney Fees (Doc. 33) is GRANTED.
2. Plaintiff is awarded attorney’s fees in the amount of $5,765.95.
ORDERED in Tampa, Florida, on December 3, 2019.
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?