Steele v. Commissioner Social Security

Filing 19

ORDER -- IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 1. Plaintiffs counsel shall have until September 9, 2013 to supplement his motion. To that end, counsel shall submit evidence which makes clear that the prevailing rate in this District for cases such as this, and by l awyers of reasonably comparable skill and experience, is in excess of $125.00 per hour (see, e.g., Lambert v. Commr of Soc. Sec., No. 3:10-cv-435, doc. 31 (S.D. Ohio June 19, 2012) (Gary Blumenthal Esq.)). Pursuant to Bryant, any affidavit file d for this purpose must be in addition to counsels own affidavit; 2. Following Plaintiffs supplemental filing, the Commissioner shall have until September 19, 2013 to file a memorandum in opposition; and 3. In the alternative, if the parties so choose, they may file a joint stipulation, in which case this requirement is obviated. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J Newman on 8/29/13. (ea)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON
BOBBI J. STEELE,

:

Case No. 3:12-cv-156

:

District Judge Walter H. Rice
Magistrate Judge Michael J. Newman

Plaintiff,
vs.
COMMISSIONER OF
SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant.

:

:

ORDER

This case is before the Court pursuant to Plaintiff’s motion for an award of her attorney’s
fees and costs under the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d). Doc. 15.
In reviewing Plaintiff’s motion, the Court notes that it is not adequately supported by
sufficient evidence to warrant justification of payment of attorney’s fees over the statutory cap of
$125.00 per hour. See Bryant v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 578 F.3d 443, 450 (6th Cir. 1992). See
also Douglas v. Astrue, No. 3:10-cv-188, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 36735, *4-6 (S.D. Ohio 2012).
In Bryant, the Sixth Circuit held:
In requesting an increase in the hourly-fee rate, Plaintiffs bear the burden of
producing appropriate evidence to support the requested increase. Plaintiffs must
produce satisfactory evidence -- in addition to the attorney’s own affidavits -that the requested rates are in line with those prevailing in the community for
similar services by lawyers of reasonably comparable skill, experience, and
reputation.
578 F.3d at 450 (internal citations and quotations omitted) (emphasis added).
In the interest of justice, and in light of the aforementioned cases, IT IS HEREBY
ORDERED:

1. Plaintiff’s counsel shall have until September 9, 2013 to supplement his motion.
To that end, counsel shall submit evidence which makes clear that the prevailing
rate in this District for cases such as this, and by lawyers of reasonably
comparable skill and experience, is in excess of $125.00 per hour (see, e.g.,
Lambert v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., No. 3:10-cv-435, doc. 31 (S.D. Ohio June 19,
2012) (Gary Blumenthal Esq.)). Pursuant to Bryant, any affidavit filed for this
purpose must be in addition to counsel’s own affidavit;
2. Following Plaintiff’s supplemental filing, the Commissioner shall have until
September 19, 2013 to file a memorandum in opposition; and
3. In the alternative, if the parties so choose, they may file a joint stipulation, in
which case this requirement is obviated.
August 29, 2013

s/ Michael J. Newman
United States Magistrate Judge

2