Wallace v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 23

ORDER granting 20 Motion for Attorney Fees. Signed by Honorable Timothy D. DeGiusti on 5/18/2012. (mb)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA LACIE R. WALLACE, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security Administration, Defendant. Case No. CIV-11-896-D ORDER This matter comes before the Court for consideration of Plaintiff’s Application for an Award of Attorneys’ Fees Under the Equal Access to Justice Act [Doc. No. 20]. Plaintiff seeks an award of fees pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), in the amount of $4,657.40 for legal services provided by her attorney (25.6 hours) in the case. Plaintiff is the prevailing party in this action under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) by virtue of the Agreed Judgment and Order of Remand entered April 10, 2012. The Commissioner has responded by stating he has no objection to the requested amount or to an award payable to Plaintiff, consistent with Astrue v. Ratliff, 130 S. Ct. 2521, 2529 (2010), and Manning v. Astrue, 510 F.3d 1246, 1255 (10th Cir. 2007). After consideration of the law, the record, and the arguments of the parties, the Court finds: (1) the Commissioner’s position in the case was not substantially justified; (2) Plaintiff is entitled to an award of attorney fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d); and (3) the amount of attorney fees requested is reasonable. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Application is GRANTED. The Court orders an award of attorney fees to Plaintiff pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act in the amount of $4,657.40. Should an additional fee award under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b) subsequently be authorized, Plaintiff’s attorney shall refund the smaller amount to Plaintiff as required by Weakley v. Bowen, 803 F.2d 575, 580 (10th Cir. 1986). IT IS SO ORDERED this 18th day of May 16, 2012. 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?