Woodard v. Colvin
Filing
21
ORDER granting Plaintiff's 20 Motion for Attorney Fees. Signed by Magistrate Judge David Keesler on 7/11/2017. (kby)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
ASHEVILLE DIVISION
CIVIL ACTION FILE NO. 1:16-CV-298-RLV-DCK
DOUGLAS LEE WOODARD,
Plaintiff,
)
)
)
v.
)
)
NANCY A. BERRYHILL,
)
Acting Commissioner,
)
Social Security Administration,
)
)
Defendant.
)
__________________________________________)
ORDER
THIS MATTER IS BEFORE THE COURT on “Plaintiff's Motion For Attorney's
Fees” (Document No. 20) filed July 11, 2017. This motion has been referred to the undersigned
Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), and immediate review is appropriate. Having
carefully considered the motion and the record, and noting consent of Defendant’s counsel, the
undersigned will grant the motion.
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that “Plaintiff's Motion For Attorney's Fees”
(Document No. 20) is GRANTED, and the Court orders as follows:
1.
That the Social Security Administration shall pay $6,223.56 in attorney fees to the
plaintiff, Douglas Lee Woodard, in full settlement and satisfaction of any and all claims
for attorney fees for legal services rendered under the Equal Access to Justice Act
("EAJA"), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d).
2.
With respect to Plaintiff's signed assignment of EAJA fees to his attorney, in accordance
with Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586, 130 S.Ct. 2521, 177 L.Ed.2d 91 (2010), the
Commissioner will determine whether Plaintiff owes a debt to the United States. If so, the
debt will be satisfied first, and if any funds remain, they will be made payable to Plaintiff
and mailed to Plaintiff's counsel. If the Department of the Treasury reports to the
Commissioner that the Plaintiff does not owe a federal debt, the government will exercise
its discretion and honor the assignment of EAJA fees, and pay the awarded fees directly to
Plaintiff's counsel.
SO ORDERED.
Signed: July 11, 2017
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?