Dunn v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 24

ORDER granting 23 Motion for Attorney Fees. Signed by Magistrate Judge Clifford J. Proud on 1/2/2019. (jmt)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS DIANA M. DUNN, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Plaintiff, vs. COMMISSIONER of SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant. Civil No. 18-cv-404-CJP ORDER for ATTORNEY’S FEES PROUD, Magistrate Judge: Before the Court is Defendant’s Agreed Motion to Award Attorney Fees. (Doc. 23). The parties agree that plaintiff is entitled to an award of attorney’s fees and expenses in the amount of $7,282.74. The Court finds that plaintiff is the prevailing party and is entitled to an award of attorney’s fees and expenses pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. §2412(d)(1)(B). The Court further finds that the agreed upon amount is reasonable and appropriate. Per the parties’ agreement, this award shall fully and completely satisfy any and all claims for fees, costs, and expenses that may have been payable to plaintiff in this matter pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412. Defendant’s Agreed Motion to Award Attorney Fees (Doc. 23) is GRANTED. 1 The Court awards plaintiff the sum of $7,282.74 (seven-thousand two-hundred and eighty-two dollars and seventy-four cents) for attorney fees and expenses pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act. These funds shall be payable to plaintiff, per Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586 (2010). See also, Harrington v. Berryhill, 906 F.3d 561 (7th Cir. 2018). However, in accordance with the parties’ agreement, any part of the award that is not subject to set-off to pay plaintiff’s pre-existing debt to the United States shall be made payable to plaintiff’s attorney pursuant to the EAJA assignment previously executed by plaintiff and counsel. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATE: January 2, 2019. s/ Clifford J. Proud CLIFFORD J. PROUD U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE 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?