Hill v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration

Filing 46

ORDER granting 41 Motion for Attorney Fees per Rule 406b, awarding $32,512.00 in attorney's fees. Signed by Honorable J. Michelle Childs on 08/16/2018.(bshr, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA ROCK HILL DIVISION David R. Hill, Plaintiff, v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Civil Action No.: 0:15-cv-05091-JMC ORDER This matter is before the court on Plaintiff David R. Hill’s (“Plaintiff”) Motion for Attorney’s Fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b). (ECF No. 41.) Defendant responded to Plaintiff’s Motion (ECF No. 43) and the parties agreed to a stipulation that Plaintiff should be awarded thirtytwo thousand five hundred twelve dollars and zero cents ($32,512.00) in attorney’s fees, which were withheld from Plaintiff’s past-due benefits. (ECF No. 41; ECF No. 43.) After reviewing Plaintiff’s Motion and Defendant’s Response, the court finds that the stipulated request for fees is reasonable and that Plaintiff is entitled to an award of attorney’s fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b). In accordance with Gisbrecht v. Barnhart, 535 U.S. 789, 796 (2002), when fees are awarded under the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412, and 42 U.S.C. § 406(b), a claimant’s attorney must refund the smaller amount to the claimant. Plaintiff received $5,500.00 in fees under the EAJA on September 13, 2017. (ECF No. 40.) Therefore, as Plaintiff’s counsel has agreed to do, the court directs that Plaintiff’s counsel remit $5,500.00 to Plaintiff. (ECF No. 41 at 1-2.) After a thorough review of Plaintiff’s Motion (ECF No. 41) and Defendant’s Response 1 (ECF No. 43), the court GRANTS Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees (ECF No. 41) and awards $32,512.00 in attorney’s fees. IT IS SO ORDERED. United States District Judge August 16, 2018 Columbia, South Carolina 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?