Whitson v. Colvin
Filing
19
ORDER granting 17 Motion for Attorney Fees. Signed by District Judge Robert J. Conrad, Jr on 3/22/16. (ssh)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
ASHEVILLE DIVISION
3:15-cv-157-RJC
SHARON L. WHITSON,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
CAROLYN W. COLVIN,
)
Acting Commissioner of
)
Social Security Administration,
)
)
Defendant.
)
__________________________________________ )
ORDER
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Plaintiff’s Consent Motion for Attorneys’ Fees
pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412, filed on February 18,
2016. (Doc. No. 17). Plaintiff indicates that Defendant has consented to this Motion, and
Defendant has not objected to the requested fees and the time for doing so has expired. Having
reviewed the Motion, supporting materials, memorandum in support, and the case file, the Court
determines that Plaintiff should be awarded attorneys’ fees under EAJA, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), in
the amount of $5,000.00.
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorneys’ Fees, (Doc.
No. 17), is GRANTED. The Court will award attorneys’ fees in the amount of $5,000.00, and
pursuant to Comm’r of Soc. Sec. v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586 (2010), the fee award will first be
subject to offset of any debt Plaintiff may owe to the United States. The Commissioner will
determine whether Plaintiff owes a debt to the United States. If so, that 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 United States Department of the Treasury reports to the Commissioner that the
Plaintiff does not owe any debt, the Government will exercise its discretion and honor an
assignment of EAJA fees, and pay those fees directly to Plaintiff’s counsel. No additional
petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d) shall be filed.
Signed: March 22, 2016
2
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?