Martin v. Commissioner of Social Security
Filing
21
ENTRY AND ORDER GRANTING UNOPPOSED PETITION FOR ATTORNEY FEES PURSUANT TO 42 U.S.C. § 406(b)(1) 18 . Signed by Judge Thomas M. Rose on 3-29-2017. (de)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON
MICHAEL JAMES MARTIN,
:
Case No. 3:15-cv-131
:
Plaintiff,
:
Judge Thomas M. Rose
:
v.
:
:
NANCY A. BERRYHILL,
:
Acting Commissioner of the Social
:
Security Administration,
:
:
Defendant.
:
______________________________________________________________________________
ENTRY AND ORDER GRANTING UNOPPOSED PETITION FOR
ATTORNEY FEES PURSUANT TO 42 U.S.C. § 406(b)(1) (DOC. 18)
______________________________________________________________________________
The Court, having read Plaintiff Michael James Martin’s Petition for Attorney Fees
Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 406(b)(1) (Doc. 18) and all the supporting documents thereto, and
noting that the Commissioner of Social Security filed a Notice of No Objection (Doc. 20)
to the Petition:
IT IS ORDERED that attorney fees be granted in the amount of $10,559.00, which
represents less than 25% ($17,672.25) of the past due benefits awarded to the Plaintiff, be
remitted to the LAW OFFICES OF HARRY J. BINDER AND CHARLES E. BINDER,
P.C. Upon receipt of this sum and the previously awarded Equal Access to Justice Act
fees of $5,200.00, counsel for Plaintiff is directed to remit the lesser of the two fees directly
to the Plaintiff. Nothing in this order will preclude Plaintiff’s duly appointed
representative(s) from requesting fees under 406(a) for time spent handling Plaintiff’s case
before the Social Security Administration providing that the combined fees approved
under 406(a) and 406(b) does not exceed $17,672.25, which represents 25% of the
retroactive benefits awarded to the Plaintiff.
DONE and ORDERED in Dayton, Ohio, this Tuesday, March 28, 2017.
s/Thomas M. Rose
________________________________
THOMAS M. ROSE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?