Moore v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 20

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION 18 FOR AN AWARD OF FEES AND EXPENSES UNDER THE EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT. Signed by Judge James D. Todd on 1/13/15. (Todd, James)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
EASTERN DIVISION
TABITHA MOORE,
Plaintiff,
VS.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting
Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 14-1096-JDT

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR AN AWARD OF FEES
AND EXPENSES UNDER THE EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT

The Plaintiff, Tabitha Moore, filed this action to obtain judicial review of the
Defendant Commissioner’s determination that she was not disabled. On October 17, 2014,
the Court granted the Commissioner’s unopposed motion for a remand pursuant to sentence
four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g); judgment was entered on October 21, 2014. (ECF Nos. 16 & 17.)
Plaintiff has now filed a motion for an award of attorney fees pursuant to the Equal Access
to Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d). (ECF No. 18.)
Under the EAJA, the court shall “award to a prevailing party . . . fees and other
expenses . . . incurred by that party in any civil action . . . , including proceedings for judicial
review of agency action, brought by or against the United States . . . , unless the Court finds
that the position of the United States was substantially justified or that special circumstances
make an award unjust.” 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(1)(A). As Plaintiff obtained an order reversing

and remanding the Commissioner’s decision pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g),
she qualifies as a prevailing party under the EAJA. The Commissioner has filed a response
to the motion stating that she does not oppose the requested fee award (ECF No. 19), thus
conceding that her position in this case was not substantially justified. The Court also
concludes that there are no special circumstances that would make an award unjust.
Consequently, Plaintiff is entitled to an award under the EAJA.
Plaintiff’s attorney, John D. Hamilton, has submitted his affidavit and other
documentation in support of the EAJA motion. (ECF Nos. 18-1, 18-3 & 18-4.) The
Affidavit includes an itemized time statement documenting 20.70 hours of work in this case
(ECF No. 18-1 at 1-2.) Plaintiff has requested an award of fees in the amount of $3,926.79.
The EAJA provides that “attorney fees shall not be awarded in excess of $125 per hour
unless the court determines that an increase in the cost of living or a special factor . . .
justifies a higher fee.” 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(2)(A). Plaintiff has requested an award at the
rate of $189.70 per hour. The increase is based on the rise in the cost of living since the
EAJA statutory rate was last increased.
The Court finds that Plaintiff’s requested hourly rate and the number of hours
expended in this case are reasonable. Therefore, the motion for attorney fees is GRANTED,
and Plaintiff is awarded attorney fees under the EAJA in the amount of $3,926.79.
The motion for attorney fees includes a copies of Plaintiff’s representation agreement
and a limited power of attorney demonstrating that she has assigned the right to receive any
EAJA fees to counsel. Once it is verified that Plaintiff owes no pre-existing debt to the

2

United States, see Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586 (2010) (holding that EAJA fees belong to
the litigant rather than to the attorney and may be offset to satisfy the litigant’s pre-existing
debt to the Government), the Commissioner shall honor that fee assignment and pay the
EAJA fee award to counsel.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/ James D. Todd
JAMES D. TODD
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

3