Favors v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, S.D. Ohio·Decided June 8, 2023·No. 3:20-cv-00515·Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION

Josie F., ) Plaintiff, ) ) Case No.: 3:20-cv-00515 V. ) ) Magistrate Judge King Kilolo Kijakazi, ) Acting Commissioner of Social Security, ) 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 Stipulation 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 $4,050.00 and costs in the amount of $0, for a total award of $4,050.00; 2. Counsel for the parties shall verify whether or not Plaintiff owes a preexisting debt to the United States subject to offset, consistent with Astrue v. Ratliff, 130 S.Ct. 2521, 560 U.S. 586 (2010). Ifno 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 3. The case remains terminated on the docket of this Court. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Date: June 8, 2023 Entered: Norah. Wher (anh Kang

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

Favors v. Commissioner of Social Security, (S.D. Ohio 2023).

Favors v. Commissioner of Social Security (Favors 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)