HILL v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY

District Court, M.D. Georgia·Decided October 11, 2024·No. 5:23-cv-00028·Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA MACON DIVISION

ANGELA HILL, : : Plaintiff, : : v. : No. 5:23-cv-00028-CHW : COMMISSIONER OF : Social Security Appeal SOCIAL SECURITY : : Defendant. :

ORDER The Court recently amended its order remanding the above-styled case to the Commissioner, which caused judgment to be entered on September 11, 2024. (Docs. 15, 16). Now pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for an award of attorney’s fees pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412. (Doc. 17). The motion is unopposed. (Id.) Plaintiff requests attorney’s fees, in the amount of $6,318.17 for 25.9 hours expended in litigating this case. (Doc. 17-2). The Commissioner does not oppose Plaintiff’s request, the requested hours appear to be within a reasonable range, and Plaintiff’s fee calculations appear to comport with the Court’s formula established in Hartage v. Astrue, No. 4:09-cv-48, 2011 WL 1123401 (M.D. Ga. 2011). Plaintiff’s motion (Doc. 17) is GRANTED. It is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiff is awarded $6,318.17 in attorney’s fees under the EAJA. The fee award should be made payable to Plaintiff directly. Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586, 589 (2010). SO ORDERED, this 11th day of October, 2024.

s/ Charles H. Weigle Charles H. Weigle United States Magistrate Judge

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

HILL v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, (M.D. Ga. 2024).

HILL v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY (HILL 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)