Allen, Cameron v. Berryhill, Nancy
Filing
27
ORDER granting 19 Motion for Attorney Fees under the EAJA. Plaintiff awarded attorney fees in the amount of $4,966.20. Signed by District Judge James D. Peterson on 12/10/2018. (kwf)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
CAMERON ALLEN,
Plaintiff,
ORDER
v.
18-cv-338-jdp
NANCY BERRYHILL
Acting Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.
Plaintiff has filed a motion for attorney fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28
U.S.C. § 2412, in the amount of $4,966.20 in full satisfaction of any claim for fees and costs in
this case. Defendant Nancy Berryhill, Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, does
not oppose plaintiff’s counsel’s request. Accordingly, I am granting plaintiff’s counsel’s motion.
EAJA fees belong to plaintiff as the prevailing party, not to his attorney. See Astrue v. Ratliff,
560 U.S. 586 (2010). Accordingly, the EAJA award is subject to offset, to satisfy any pre-existing
debt that plaintiff may owe the United States. Id. Provided that the award is offset to satisfy any
pre-existing debt, the prevailing party may assign the fee award directly to his attorney. See
Mathews-Sheets v. Astrue, 653 F.3d 560, 565 (7th Cir. 2011), overruled on other grounds by Sprinkle v.
Colvin, 777 F.3d 421 (7th Cir. 2015).
After entry of this order, if counsel for the parties can verify that plaintiff owes no preexisting debt subject to offset, then the Commissioner will direct that $4,966.20 be paid to Dana
Duncan, pursuant to the EAJA assignment signed by plaintiff and his counsel. Dkt. 20-1.
ORDER
IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff Cameron Allen is awarded attorney fees and costs in the
amount of $4,966.20. This amount is to be made payable to plaintiff’s attorney, Dana Duncan,
contingent upon payment of money owed to the United States.
Entered: December 10, 2018.
BY THE COURT:
/s/
_______________________________________
JAMES D. PETERSON
District Judge
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?