Bennett v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, S.D. Ohio·Decided March 31, 2022·No. 3:21-cv-00299·Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO NEAL B.,1 ) ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:21-cv-00299 Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) MAGISTRATE JUDGE SILVAIN KILOLO KIJAKAZI, ) ACTING COMMISSIONER OF ) SOCIAL SECURITY,1 ) ) Defendant. ) ORDER This cause coming before the Court on the joint motion of the parties, due notice having been given, and the Court being fully advised, IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT: 1. The Parties’ Joint Motion for an Award of Attorney’s Fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act is accepted and the Commissioner shall pay Plaintiff’s attorney fees in the amount of $1,108.00, and no costs, for a total award of $1,108.00; 2. Counsel for the parties shall verify whether or not Plaintiff owes a pre-existing debt to the United States subject to offset, consistent with Astrue v. Ratliff, 130 S.Ct. 2521, 560 U.S. 586 (2010). If no such pre-existing debt exists, Defendant shall pay the EAJA award directly to Plaintiff’s counsel pursuant to the EAJA assignment signed by Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s counsel; and 3. The case remains terminated on the docket of this Court. IT IS SO ORDERED. March 31, 2022 s_/_P_e_te_r_ B__. _S_il_v_a_in_,_ J_r_ _ __________ Peter B. Silvain, Jr. United States Magistrate Judge 1 The Committee on Court Administration and Case Management of the Judicial Conference of the United States has

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

Bennett v. Commissioner of Social Security, (S.D. Ohio 2022).

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

Related

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