Pope v. Astrue

Filing 24

ORDER granting 21 Motion for Attorney Fees Signed by Honorable David C. Bramlette, III on 10/8/2014 (ECW)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI
NORTHERN DIVISION
WILLIAM H. POPE

PLAINTIFF

VS.

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:13-cv-870(DCB)(MTP)

MICHAEL J. ASTRUE 1
Commissioner of Social Security Administration

DEFENDANT

ORDER AWARDING ATTORNEY FEES
This cause is before the Court pursuant to the Plaintiff’s
Petition for Attorney Fees (docket entry 21) filed by plaintiff
William H. Pope pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act
(“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412.
fee request.

The Commissioner does not oppose the

See Defendant’s Response to Plaintiff’s Petition for

Attorney Fees (docket entry 23).

Being fully advised in the

premises, the Court finds as follows:
The EAJA provides that a court shall award attorney fees and
costs to a prevailing party in a civil action brought against the
United States unless the court finds that the position of the
government

was

substantially

justified

circumstances make an award unjust.

or

that

special

28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(1)(A).

A

party who obtains a remand of a social security appeal pursuant to
the fourth sentence of § 405(g) qualifies as a prevailing party for
purposes of fees under the EAJA.
1324 (5th Cir.1994).
1

Breaux v. U.S.D.H.H.S., 20 F.3d

The Commissioner does not contest that the

Effective February 14, 2013, Carolyn W. Colvin became the
acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration.

plaintiff is entitled to recover fees, and therefore does not
contest that the plaintiff is the prevailing party.

Nor does the

government contend that its position was substantially justified.
The EAJA provides in relevant part that the amount of fees
awarded:
shall be based upon prevailing market rates for the kind
and quality of the services furnished, except 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 or a special factor ... justifies a higher
fee.
28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(2)(A)(ii). The EAJA “vests the district courts
with discretion to arrive at a reasonable rate for attorneys’ fees
based on cost-of-living adjustments and other factors.”

Yoes v.

Barnhart, 467 F.3d 426, 426 (5th Cir. 2006)(citation omitted). When
a given locale has experienced a significant change in the cost of
living, the court should increase the hourly rate beyond the
nominal statutory cap.
Cir. 1988).
increase

Baker v. Bowen, 839 F.2d 1075, 1084 (5th

The rate need not precisely track the cost of living

for

the

geographical

area,

but

instead

should

be

calculated “only to the extent necessary to ensure an adequate
source of representation.”
The

plaintiff

Id.

requests

attorney

fees

of

5.5

hours

at

$184.13/hr. ($1,011.72); 21.0 hours at $187.00/hr. ($3,927.00); and
1.0 hour at 189.50/hr. ($189.50), for a total of $5,129.22.

The

rates charged by the plaintiff’s attorney are in keeping with
recent

attorney

fee

awards

by
2

federal

district

courts

in

Mississippi.

See, e.g., Moore v. Colvin, 2014 WL 2480083 (N.D.

Miss. June 3, 2014); Forrest v. Colvin, 2014 WL 51442 (N.D. Miss.
Jan. 7, 2014).

The government makes no challenge to the hourly

rates requested, and the Court finds the hourly rates reasonable.
As for the number of hours expended, the Court has reviewed
counsel’s itemization of fees and finds that it also is reasonable.
In the absence of any objection by the government, the Court finds
that the attorney fees requested were reasonably incurred and
should be awarded.
In Astrue v. Ratliff, 130 S.Ct. 2521, 2528-29 (2010), the
Supreme Court held that EAJA fees are payable to litigants, not
their counsel.

In addition, attorney fees awards are subject to

offset where the claimant has outstanding federal debts.
2528.

Id., at

Therefore, the Court finds it appropriate to direct that

payment be made to the plaintiff for the benefit of his attorney.
Accordingly,
IT

IS

HEREBY

ORDERED

that

the

Plaintiff’s

Petition

for

Attorney Fees (docket entry 21) is GRANTED, and the Commissioner
shall pay the plaintiff a total of $5,129.22 for the benefit of his
attorney (the law office of Gary R. Parvin).
SO ORDERED, this the 8th day of October, 2014.

/s/ David Bramlette
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

3