Scott v. Astrue

Filing 25

ORDER granting 22 Motion for Attorney Fees. Signed by David A. Sanders on 7/19/10. (ncb, USDC)

Download PDF
Scott v. Astrue Doc. 25 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI GREENVILLE DIVISION PETER E. SCOTT VS. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY ORDER AWARDING ATTORNEY FEES Before the court is the claimant's motion (# 22) for payment of attorney fees pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act ("EAJA"), 28 U.S.C. § 2412. In these proceedings, the claimant sought judicial review of the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security, denying a claim for benefits. By Judgment (# 20) dated June 3, 2010, the court remanded this case to the Commissioner for further proceedings. The claimant now seeks attorney fees under the EAJA on the grounds that he was the prevailing party and that the Commissioner's position was not "substantially justified." By the motion and attached exhibits, the claimant requests an award of $5,978.00 in attorney fees and $350.00 in costs to be awarded for the benefit of his attorneys, Binder and Binder, PC. The Commissioner does not object to the claimant's request for fees and costs and agrees that the claimant should receive the total amounts requested. The court, having considered the foregoing and the record of this case, finds that $5,978.00 in attorney fees is reasonable and appropriate and that the claimant should also be reimbursed $350.00 in costs. Therefore, it is ORDERED that the claimant's motion for payment of attorney fees under the EAJA is hereby GRANTED, and the Commissioner shall pay the claimant $5,978.00 for the benefit of the above named attorneys. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the claimant shall also receive $350.00 from the Judgment fund., also awarded for the benefit of his attorneys. THIS, the 19th day of July, 2010. PLAINTIFF CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:09CV100-DAS DEFENDANT /s/ David A. Sanders U. S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE Dockets.Justia.com

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?