Henson v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, S.D. Illinois·Decided July 11, 2023·No. 3:21-cv-01363·Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS PAUL HENSON, ) Plaintiff, vs. Case No. 21-CV-1363-SMY COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, ) Defendant. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Before the Court is the Joint Motion to Award Attorney Fees and Expenses under the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. §2412(d) (Doc. 26). The Court finds that Plaintiff is the prevailing party and is entitled to an award of attorney’s fees pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. §2412(d)(1)(A). The Court further finds that the amount requested is reasonable and appropriate. Accordingly, the Joint Motion to Award Attorney Fees and Expenses under the Equal Access to Justice Act (Doc. 26) is GRANTED. The Court awards Plaintiff $3,000.00 for attorney’s fees and expenses under the Equal Access to Justice Act. These funds shall be payable to Plaintiff in accordance with Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586 (2010); Harrington v. Berryhill, 906 F.3d 561 (7th Cir. 2018). This award shall fully and completely satisfy any and all claims for fees that may have been payable to Plaintiff in this matter under the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412. Any part of the award that is not subject to set-off to pay Plaintiff’s pre-existing debt to the United States shall be made payable to Plaintiffs attorney pursuant to any EAJA assignment previously executed by Plaintiff and counsel. IT IS SO ORDERED. Aone MU oe DATED: July 11, 2023 STACI M. YANDLE United States District Judge

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

Henson v. Commissioner of Social Security, (S.D. Ill. 2023).

Henson v. Commissioner of Social Security (Henson 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)
Harrington v. Berryhill
906 F.3d 561 (Seventh Circuit, 2018)