McCann v. Berryhill
Filing
14
ORDER granting 13 Motion for Attorney Fees. Signed by Magistrate Judge David S. Cayer on 5/3/18. (tob)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
CHARLOTTE DIVISION
NO. 3:17-cv-454-DSC
TIMOTHY C. MCCANN,
Plaintiff,
vs.
NANCY A. BERRYHILL,
Acting Commissioner of Social Security
Defendant.
________________________________
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ORDER
Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees under the Equal Access to
Justice Act (EAJA). Plaintiff’s Counsel and Defendant’s Counsel have conferred, and Defendant consents
to Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees. Plaintiff-Appellant has assigned his rights to any attorney’s fees
payable under the EAJA to his counsel.
Pursuant to the United States Supreme Court’s ruling in Astrue v. Ratliff, 130 S. Ct. 2521 (2010),
these attorney’s fees are payable to Plaintiff as the prevailing party, and are subject to offset through the
Treasury Department’s Offset Program to satisfy any pre-existing debt Plaintiff may owe to the
government. If, subsequent to the entry of the Court’s EAJA Order, the Commissioner determines that
Plaintiff owes no debt to the government that would subject this award of attorney’s fees to offset, the
Commissioner may honor Plaintiff’s signed assignment of EAJA fees providing for payment of the
subject fees to Plaintiff’s counsel, rather than to Plaintiff. If, however, the Commissioner discovers that
Plaintiff owes the government any debt subject to offset, the Commissioner shall pay any attorney fees
remaining after such offset to Plaintiff, rather than to counsel.
Plaintiff shall be paid $400.00 in costs and $2,038.78 in attorney’s fees from the Judgment Fund
by the U.S. Department of the Treasury pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §2412(a)(1).
1
Accordingly, the Court GRANTS to Motion. Defendant is ordered to pay $2,438.78 directly to
Counsel for Plaintiff.
SO ORDERED.
Signed: May 3, 2018
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?