King v. Berryhill

Filing 21

ORDER granting 20 Motion for Attorney Fees. Signed by Chief Judge James C. Dever III on 4/15/2018. (Briggeman, N.)

Download PDF
.IN THE UNITED STATES DiSTRICT COURT FOR THE-EASTERN DISTRICTOFNORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION No. 5: 17-cv-437-D JOHN kiNd·,. ) Plaintiff, V. ) ) ) ) 'NANCYBERRYHILL, Acting Cgliimissi9ner of Social Se·curity"' Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) CONSENT ORDER This ac.tiqn being suomi~ted to the Court for entry ofa Consent .Qgl,er agreed to by the parties ·and {t appearing that Plaintiff. by and through his attomey, lu1.s executed this Consent Order and Defendant has ·executed this Consent Order, by and through tl1e undersigned Assistant United States Attorney; and it appearing that the parties have agreed that the :Cotilutlssionei· of Social Security shOtdd pay the su!11 of $3,600.00 for attorney· fees iri full and final settlement of all claims for attorney fetes. arising under the Equal Access to Jl.}stice Act ("EAJA"). 28 U.S. C. § 2412(d),. It is' ther~fore ORDERED that the Conu'nissioner ofSocia:l Securicypay to Ph1iutiff the. stun .of$3,600,00, sent to Plaintiffs counsel's office address, in full satisfaction of any and all claims arising under EAJA, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), ·and upon the payment of such sum this case js dismissed with prejudice. SO ORDERED. This .1£ day of April 2018. /1 - D Q._V OJ.. JAMES C. DEVER III Chief United States District Judge E:_ONSENTED TQ:: lsi CHARLOTTE W. HALL Attorney for: Plaintiff N.C. Bar #·41290 ChariesT, Hall La:w Firm, P.C.. P:.o.~ Box to6i9 Raleigh, J;:-rC 27()05 Teieplione~ (9 I9) 791-1883· Fax: (919) 791-!'886 charlotte@ch~rleshallfirm. com .lsi CA,SS,IA W: PARSON Special Assistant United States Attoniey Social Security Administration 64Q1 S¢ctirity B9tllevatd Room 617, Aitmeye:rBuildihg Baltimore; Maryland 21235 Telephone: (410) 966-0446 Fax: (410) 597-1435 Maryland Bar ·

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?