Carroll v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration

District Court, D. South Carolina·Decided April 30, 2020·No. 1:18-cv-02273·Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA AIKEN DIVISION

Michelle Rollins Carroll, ) Civil Action No. 1:18-cv-02273-JMC ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ORDER ) Andrew M. Saul, Commissioner of Social ) Security Administration, ) ) Defendant. ) ____________________________________)

The matter is before the court is Plaintiff Michelle Rollins Carroll’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”) 28 U.S.C. § 2412 (2019). (ECF No. 25.) Plaintiff’s counsel seeks reimbursement in the amount of five thousand seventy-nine dollars and thirty-eight cents ($5,479.38) in fees and zero ($0.00) dollars in costs. (Id. at 1.) The Commissioner filed a Stipulation on April 24, 2020, notifying the court that the parties agreed to an award of five thousand two hundred dollars and zero cents ($5,200.00) in attorney’s fees. (ECF No. 26.) In accordance with Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586, 589 (2010), EAJA fees awarded by this court belong to the litigant, thus subjecting EAJA fees to be offset under the Treasury Offset Program, 31 U.S.C. § 3716(c)(3)(B) (2014). Therefore, the court directs that fees be payable to Plaintiff and delivered to Plaintiff's counsel. See Ratliff, 560 U.S. at 589. The amount of attorney’s fees payable to Plaintiff will be the balance of stipulated attorney’s fees remaining after subtracting the amount of Plaintiff’s outstanding federal debt. See 31 U.S.C. § 3716 (2014). If Plaintiff’s outstanding federal debt exceeds the amount of attorney’s fees under the stipulation, the stipulated amount will be used to offset Plaintiff’s federal debt and no attorney’s fees shall be paid. (See ECF No. 25 at 1-2.) After a thorough review of Plaintiff’s Motion and the Commissioner’s Stipulation, the court finds that the request for fees is reasonable and that Plaintiff is entitled to an award of attorney’s fees totaling five thousand two hundred dollars and zero cents ($5,200.00). As such, the court GRANTS Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees (ECF No. 25) based on the parties’ stipulation. IT IS SO ORDERED. t i Wecfalle. Childe) United States District Judge April 30, 2020 Columbia, South Carolina

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

Carroll v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration, (D.S.C. 2020).

Carroll v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration (Carroll v. Commissioner of 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)