Turner v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 23

ORDER granting 21 Motion for Attorney Fees. Attorney fees under EAJA is granted in the agreed upon amount of $5,030.03, payable to the plaintiff, Robert Turner, from the Social Security Administration, and mailed to plaintiff's attorney's address after any offset. Signed by Senior Judge Donald E OBrien on 8/29/14. (djs)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA
CENTRAL DIVISION
ROBERT TURNER,
Plaintiff,

No. 13-CV-3008-DEO

vs.

ORDER

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL
SECURITY, Carolyn W. Colvin,
Defendant.
____________________
This matter is before the Court pursuant to “Plaintiff’s
Application For Attorney’s Fees And Costs Under 28 U.S.C. §
2412 (EAJA)” (Docket No. 21), requesting attorney fees and
costs in the amount of $5,030.03.
The

Defendant

has

filed,

“Defendant’s

Response

To

Plaintiff’s Application For Attorney Fees Pursuant To The
Equal Access To Justice Act” (Docket No. 22), stating that the
defendant has no objection to plaintiff’s request for attorney
fees under EAJA in the amount of $5,030.03. Defendant further
states:
Plaintiff signed a fee agreement assigning
any fee under the EAJA to plaintiff’s
attorney. Following an order by this Court
awarding an EAJA fee payable to plaintiff,
defendant will verify whether plaintiff
owes a debt to the United States that is
subject to offset.
If there is no debt
owed by plaintiff, the fee will be made

payable to plaintiff’s attorney based on
the assignment.
Docket No. 22.
28 U.S.C. § 2412(d) of the EAJA provides for the award of
fees and expenses if:

(1) the party requesting the fees

prevailed; (2) the position of the United States was not
“substantially justified;” (3) the fees were incurred by the
moving party in a “civil action . . . including proceedings
for judicial review of agency action;” (4) the action was
brought

by

or

against

the

United

States;

(5)

the

court

entering the ruling had “jurisdiction of that action;” (6) the
party seeking fees submitted an application 30 days after
final judgment, specifying the “amount sought, including an
itemized statement . . . stating the actual time expended and
the rate at which fees and other expenses were computed;” (7)
the amount sought is reasonable under the circumstances; and
(8) there are no “special circumstances” making “an award
unjust.”

(citation omitted).

In this case, Plaintiff has satisfied each necessary
element.

Plaintiff prevailed in a civil action against the

Commissioner of Social Security (Docket No. 19).

This Court

properly exercised jurisdiction pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§
2

405(g) and 1383(c)(3). The Commissioner was not substantially
justified in that the overwhelming weight of the evidence
supported the conclusion that a remand to the Commissioner for
further consideration was appropriate.

Plaintiff’s request

for attorney’s fees included an itemized statement of the
actual

time

expended

(Docket

No.

21).

Neither

the

Commissioner nor this Court consider the amount sought to be
unreasonable under the circumstances.

1

And, finally, this

Court is unaware of any special circumstances which would
render the award unjust.
Therefore, as agreed to by the parties, attorneys fees
under EAJA is granted in the agreed upon amount of $5,030.03,
payable

to

the

plaintiff

from

the

Social

Security

Administration, and mailed to plaintiff’s attorney’s address
after any offset.

2

1

28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(2)(A) provides that “attorney fees
shall not be awarded in excess of $125 per hour unless the
court determines that an increase in the cost of living . . .
justifies a higher fee.” (citation omitted). In this case,
the Court has reviewed the Itemization of Fees provided by
Attorney Jensen regarding the charged rate in this case
(Docket No. 21).
2

The parties agreed to a fee amount which is subject to
(continued...)
3

IT IS SO ORDERED this 29th day of August, 2014.

__________________________________
Donald E. O’Brien, Senior Judge
United States District Court
Northern District of Iowa

2

(...continued)
offset as out in Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586 (2010).
If
no offset is required, the check for fees will be made payable
to the plaintiff’s counsel, pursuant to the fee assignment.
Docket No. 22.
4