Quirk v. Astrue
Filing
22
ORDER granting 21 Motion for Attorney Fees. Signed by Honorable Timothy D. DeGiusti on 1/7/2014. (mb)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
MARY JANE QUIRK,
Plaintiff,
v.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN,
Acting Commissioner of the Social
Security Administration,
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. CIV-13-57-D
ORDER AWARDING ATTORNEY’S FEES
This matter comes before the Court for consideration of Plaintiff’s Application for Award
of Attorney’s Fees Under the Equal Access to Justice Act [Doc. No. 21]. Plaintiff seeks an award
of fees pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2412, in the amount of $3,535.60 for the legal services provided by
her attorney (14.6 hours) and a paralegal (8.2 hours) in this case. Plaintiff is the prevailing party by
virtue of the Agreed Judgment and Order of Remand entered September 19, 2013. Her fee
application is unopposed by the Acting Commissioner within the time period for a response, and in
the exercise of discretion under LCvR7.1(g), the Court deems it confessed.
Further, upon consideration of the law, the record, and the facts shown by the Application,
the Court finds: (1) the Commissioner’s position in this case was not substantially justified;
(2) Plaintiff is entitled to an award of attorney’s fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28
U.S.C. § 2412(d); and (3) the amount of fees requested is reasonable.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Application is GRANTED. The Court
orders an award of attorney’s fees to Plaintiff Mary Jane Quirk pursuant to the Equal Access to
Justice Act in the amount of $3,535.60. 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 7th day of January, 2014.
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?