Cox v. Commissioner
Filing
34
ORDER granting 32 Motion for Attorney Fees. Signed by Magistrate Judge Clifford J. Proud on 4/5/2019. (jmt)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
LISA DAWN COX,
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
vs.
COMMISSIONER of SOCIAL
SECURITY,
Defendant.
Civil No. 18-cv-815-CJP
ORDER for ATTORNEY’S FEES
PROUD, Magistrate Judge:
Before the Court is the parties’ Joint Motion to Award Attorney Fees and
Expenses. (Doc. 32).
The parties agree that plaintiff is entitled to an award of attorney’s fees and
expenses in the amount of $4,298.10 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 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. 32) is
1
GRANTED. The Court awards plaintiff the sum of $4,298.10 (four thousand, two
hundred and ninety-eight dollars, and ten cents) 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:
April 5, 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?