Smith v. Commissioner of Social Security
Filing
36
ORDER granting 35 Motion for Attorney Fees. Signed by Magistrate Judge Donald G. Wilkerson on 9/19/2019. (anb2)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
DANIEL SMITH,
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
vs.
COMMISSIONER of SOCIAL
SECURITY,
Defendant.
Civil No. 18-cv-00727-DGW
ORDER for ATTORNEY’S FEES
WILKERSON, Magistrate Judge:
Before the Court is the parties’ Joint Motion to Award Attorney Fees and
Expenses. (Doc. 35).
The parties agree that plaintiff is entitled to an award of attorney’s fees and
expenses in the amount of $8,400.00 for attorney’s fees and expenses.
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 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. Plaintiff does not seek costs.
The parties’ Joint Motion to Award Attorney Fees and Expenses (Doc. 35) is
1
GRANTED. The Court awards plaintiff the sum of $8,400.00 (eight thousand, four
hundred dollars) for attorney fees and expenses. 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:
September 19, 2019.
DONALD G. WILKERSON
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?