Delton v. KEMP, Appellant, v. Margaret HECKLER, Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services, Appellee

Eighth Circuit

Delton v. KEMP, Appellant, v. Margaret HECKLER, Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services, Appellee

777 F.2d 414, 1985 U.S. App. LEXIS 23930, 11 Soc. Serv. Rev. 266

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

DecidedNovember 14, 1985

Docket85-1602

StatusPublished

Cited by8 cases

This text of 777 F.2d 414 (Delton v. KEMP, Appellant, v. Margaret HECKLER, Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services, Appellee) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Delton v. KEMP, Appellant, v. Margaret HECKLER, Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services, Appellee, 777 F.2d 414, 1985 U.S. App. LEXIS 23930, 11 Soc. Serv. Rev. 266 (8th Cir. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Delton V. Kemp appeals from a district court order denying attorneys’ fees pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA). The district court had remanded the case for further administrative consideration pursuant to the Social Security Disability Benefits Reform Act of 1984. Kemp argued that since he had achieved a remand and was thus entitled to interim benefits under 42 U.S.C. § 1383(a)(7)(A), he was therefore entitled to attorneys’ fees as a prevailing party.

This Court has previously held that obtaining a remand for further administrative consideration on the merits does not render the claimant a prevailing party for purposes of an attorney fee award under the EAJA. See Cook v. Heckler, 751 F.2d 240, 241 (8th Cir.1984). “It is the receipt of those benefits that renders a typical Social Security claimant a prevailing party.” Id. This case is not significantly different from Cook. Although Kemp may elect to receive interim benefits, the Secretary may require repayment of those benefits if the final decision affirms the original denial of benefits.

Kemp did win his appeal to the extent that the outcome was a remand for further consideration under the proper standards, one form of relief he sought on appeal. He may therefore recover the costs of the appeal as specifically allowable *415 by statute or rule of court. See 28 U.S.C. § 1920; Cook v. Heckler, 751 F.2d at 241; Cornella v. Schweiker, 741 F.2d 170, 172 (8th Cir.1984).

This decision is without prejudice to any right of Kemp to submit a claim for attorneys’ fees for this appeal if he is successful at the administrative level, or for a successful civil action appealing a final administrative decision.

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

PER CURIAM.

Delton V. Kemp appeals from a district court order denying attorneys’ fees pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA). The district court had remanded the case for further administrative consideration pursuant to the Social Security Disability Benefits Reform Act of 1984. Kemp argued that since he had achieved a remand and was thus entitled to interim benefits under 42 U.S.C. § 1383(a)(7)(A), he was therefore entitled to attorneys’ fees as a prevailing party.

This Court has previously held that obtaining a remand for further administrative consideration on the merits does not render the claimant a prevailing party for purposes of an attorney fee award under the EAJA. See Cook v. Heckler, 751 F.2d 240, 241 (8th Cir.1984). “It is the receipt of those benefits that renders a typical Social Security claimant a prevailing party.” Id. This case is not significantly different from Cook. Although Kemp may elect to receive interim benefits, the Secretary may require repayment of those benefits if the final decision affirms the original denial of benefits.

Kemp did win his appeal to the extent that the outcome was a remand for further consideration under the proper standards, one form of relief he sought on appeal. He may therefore recover the costs of the appeal as specifically allowable *415 by statute or rule of court. See 28 U.S.C. § 1920; Cook v. Heckler, 751 F.2d at 241; Cornella v. Schweiker, 741 F.2d 170, 172 (8th Cir.1984).

This decision is without prejudice to any right of Kemp to submit a claim for attorneys’ fees for this appeal if he is successful at the administrative level, or for a successful civil action appealing a final administrative decision.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

777 F.2d 414, 1985 U.S. App. LEXIS 23930, 11 Soc. Serv. Rev. 266, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/delton-v-kemp-appellant-v-margaret-heckler-secretary-department-of-ca8-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack