Carlson, Mark v. Saul, Andrew

District Court, W.D. Wisconsin·Decided March 30, 2022·No. 3:20-cv-00871·Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN WE Bern MARK T. CARLSON, Plaintiff Vv. Case No.: 20 C 871 KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant. ei ORDER i Plaintiffs counsel petitioned for attorney fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EASA). Plaintiff's counse! logged 36.40 hours of attorney time and 14.75 hours of non-attorney time. Defendant has since submitted a response in which Defendant states that he does not oppose an award for attorney fees in the amount of $8,799.35 (eight-thousand seven-hundred ninety-nine dollars and thirty-five cents). Based upon the foregoing response and the Court’s finding that the fees incurred are both reasonable and necessary and qualify under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), IT IS EEREBY ORDERED that an award of attorney fees in the sum of $8,799.35 (eight- thousand seven-hundred ninety-nine dollars and thirty-five cents) shall be paid by Defendant in full satisfaction and settlement of any and all claims Plaintiff may have pursuant to the EAJA. These fees are awarded to Plaintiff and not Plaintiff's attorney and can be offset to satisfy pre- existing debts that the litigant owes the United States under Astrue v. Ratliff, 130 S. Ct. 2521, 177 L. Ed 2d 9 (2010). If counsel for the Defendant can verify that Plaintiff owes no pre-existing debt

subject to offset, Defendant shall direct that the award be made payable to Plaintiffs attorney pursuant to the EAJA assignment duly signed by Plaintiff.

TU Roba ry ad S01 Dated this dD day of March, 2024, at Mi , Wisconsin.

BY THE COURT, ibetntZ BARBARA B. CRABB United States District Judge

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

Carlson, Mark v. Saul, Andrew, (W.D. Wis. 2022).

Carlson, Mark v. Saul, Andrew (Carlson, Mark v. Saul, Andrew) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

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