Batty v. Social Security Administration

District Court, E.D. Arkansas·Decided September 14, 2020·No. 3:19-cv-00242·Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS NORTHERN DIVISION

JAUNNA BATTY PLAINTIFF

Case No. 3:19-cv-00242 JTK ANDREW SAUL, Commissioner DEFENDANT Social Security Administration ORDER Pending is Plaintiffs Motion for Attorney’s Fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412 (DE #15). In the motion, Plaintiff requests $3,392.32 in attorney’s fees and expenses. The Commissioner filed a Response and does not object to the award. (DE #17) After careful consideration, the Court hereby finds the motion should be granted and Plaintiff be awarded reasonable attorney’s fees. EAJA fees are payable to Plaintiff, not Plaintiff's attorney, and such fees are subject to an offset when the Plaintiff has outstanding federal debts. See Astrue v. Ratliff, 130 S. Ct. 2521 (2010). Therefore, subject to any offset, payment by check to the order of the Plaintiff, in care of his attorney, will issue to Plaintiffs attorney. Accordingly, the Motion for Attorney’s Fees (DE #15) is GRANTED. Plaintiff is awarded $3,392.32 IT IS SO ORDERED this 14th day of September, 2020. :

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Batty v. Social Security Administration, (E.D. Ark. 2020).

Batty v. Social Security Administration (Batty v. Social Security Administration) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Astrue v. Ratliff
560 U.S. 586 (Supreme Court, 2010)