Hart-Bevan v. Commissioner, SSA

Filing 33

MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE for 27 Motion for Attorney Fees, filed by Misty Gayle Hart-Bevan. ORDERED that Plaintiff's Application for Attorneys' Fees Under the Equal Access to Justice Act is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. Signed by District Judge Amos L. Mazzant, III on 4/20/2018. (daj, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION MISTY GAYLE HART-BEVAN § § § § § v. COMMISSIONER, SSA Civil Action No. 4:17-CV-117 (Judge Mazzant/Judge Nowak) MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Came on for consideration the report of the United States Magistrate Judge in this action, this matter having been heretofore referred to the Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636. On March 29, 2018, the report of the Magistrate Judge (Dkt. #32) was entered containing proposed findings of fact and recommendations that Plaintiff’s post-judgment Application for Attorneys’ Fees Under the Equal Access to Justice Act (Dkt. #27) be granted in part and denied in part. Having received the report of the Magistrate Judge, and no objections thereto having been timely filed, the Court is of the opinion that the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge are correct and adopts the Magistrate Judge’s report as the findings and conclusions of the Court. It is, therefore, ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Application for Attorneys’ Fees Under the Equal Access to Justice Act is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART, and the . Commissioner is directed to pay twelve thousand one hundred thirty-nine dollars and seventy-four cents ($12,139.74) as reasonable attorney’s fees and costs, made payable to Plaintiff, such payment to be mailed to Plaintiff’s counsel. IT IS SO ORDERED. SIGNED this 20th day of April, 2018. ___________________________________ AMOS L. MAZZANT UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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?