Lantrip v. Colvin

Filing 19

ORDER granting 18 Plaintiff's Motion for Attorneys Fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA). Signed by District Judge Richard Voorhees on 6/23/2017. (khm)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
ASHESVILLE DIVISION
CASE NO. 1:15-CV-00227-RLV
REBECCA LANTRIP,
Plaintiff,
v.
NANCY A. BERRYHILL,
Acting Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

ORDER

THIS MATTER IS BEFORE THE COURT on the Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorney’s
Fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412. (Doc. 18). In her Motion,
Plaintiff requests attorney’s fees in the amount of $4,160.00, representing 22.25 hours of attorney
work at an hourly rate of $186.97. Id. Plaintiff represents that Defendant consents to the fee
request and agrees that it is reasonable. Id. at 3. The Court has reviewed the Plaintiff’s request as
well as the evidence submitted in support of the request and finds that the Plaintiff’s requested
hourly rate and the hours spent on this matter are reasonable.1 See, e.g., Rogers v. Astrue, 2015
WL 9239000, at *3 (W.D.N.C. Dec. 17, 2015) (Voorhees, J.).

1

In the future, this Court requests that the attorney add more detail to the time log to reflect the actual hours spent on
specific tasks at each stage of the proceeding to avoid the initial appearance that hours spent on certain tasks are
excessive. For example, counsel’s time log lists three hours for writing a three-page response brief. (Doc. 18-1). On
its face, this time entry appears excessive; however, the Court notes that, unlike with respect to the memorandum for
summary judgment, the time log does not include an entry for reviewing case law and research relative to the response
brief. When the time for those tasks is considered, the three hour entry for the response brief is reasonable and will
be awarded as requested.

1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Plaintiff be awarded from Defendant
the sum of $4,160.00 in attorney’s fees, subject to any valid offset. See Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S.
586 (2010).
SO ORDERED.

Signed: June 23, 2017

2