John vs. Astrue
Filing
48
MEMORANDUM Opinion and Order Signed by the Honorable Jeffrey Cole on 10/11/2013:Mailed notice(jms, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION
MICHAEL O. JOHN,
Plaintiff,
v.
1
CAROLYN W. COLVIN,
Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No: 10 C 4029
Magistrate Judge Jeffrey Cole
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The plaintiff, Michael O. John has filed a petition for fees under the Equal Access to Justice
Act. [#46]. Under the Local Rules, all attorney’s fee petitions are to be accompanied by a joint
statement detailing the parties’ attempts to compromise on the issue of attorney’s fees. N.D.Ill. L.R.
54.3(e). There is no such statement attached to plaintiff’s petition. Moreover, a very brief review
of the plaintiff’s attorney’s hand-written billings statement reveals that counsel is seeking to recover
fees for at least 2.3 hours of time spent as a result of counsel’s failure to follow Judge Conlon’s July
1, 2010 scheduling order. If the plaintiff is found entitled to fees, certainly the government cannot
be held responsible for plaintiff’s counsel’s failure to either follow the order or, in the event that
counsel had a problem with the schedule, file a motion for an extension of the deadlines set in that
order in the three months that passed between the entering of the order and the dismissal of this case
for want of prosecution.
Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424, 437 (1983)(“Hours that are not
properly billed to one's client also are not properly billed to one's adversary pursuant to statutory
1
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(d), we have substituted Carolyn W. Colvin for
Michael J. Astrue as the appellee.
authority.”); Prak v. Chater, 908 F.Supp. 555, 557 (N.D.Ill. 1995)(plaintiff not entitled to EAJA fees
for motion for extension of time to file summary judgment motion); Kolesar v. Shalala, No. 93 C
3834, 1994 WL 142974 (N.D.Ill. 1994)(fees for extension of time cannot fairly be charged to
government). Accordingly, the plaintiff’s petition for fees [#46] is denied without prejudice to filing
a motion that complies with the local rules and does not seek recovery for fees that were occasioned
by counsel’s own errors. The motion will be due 14 days after the Commissioner’s staff returns to
duty.
ENTERED:
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
DATE: 10/11/13
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?