Charleswell v. Colvin

Filing 24

CONSENT ORDER granting 23 Motion for Attorney Fees. Signed by District Judge Louise Wood Flanagan on 4/3/2017. (Edwards, S.)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION No. 5:15-cv-515-FL DARIEL CHARLESWELL, Plaintiff, v. NANCY BERRYHILL, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CONSENT ORDER This action being submitted to the Court for entry of a Consent Order agreed to by the parties and it appearing that Plaintiff, by and through his attorney, has executed this Consent Order and Defendant has executed this Consent Order, by and through the undersigned Assistant United States Attorney; and it appearing that the parties have agreed that the Commissioner of Social Security should pay the sum of $2,524.50 for attorney fees and the Treasury Justice Fund should pay $400.00 in costs, in full and final settlement of all claims for attorney fees and costs arising under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA). 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d). It is therefore ORDERED that the Commissioner of Social Security pay to Plaintiff the sum of $2,524.50 in full satisfaction of any and all claims arising under EAJA, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), and reimbursement of the $400.00 filing fee from the Treasury Justice Fund delivered to counsel’s office address, and upon the payment of such sums this case is dismissed with prejudice. This _____ day of ________________, 2017. 3rd April _______________________ U.S. District Court Judge Louise Wood Flanagan CONSENTED TO: /s/ Bethany Morris Hukill Attorney for Plaintiff N.C. Bar # 43081 Charles T. Hall Law Firm, P.C. P.O. Box 10629 Raleigh, NC 27605 Telephone: (919) 791-1883 Fax: (919) 791-1886 /s/ Wanda D. Mason, Attorney Office of the General Counsel Office of Program Law Social Security Administration 6401 Security Boulevard -Alt 614 Woodlawn, MD 21235 Work - 410-966-5044

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?