Nolen v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, W.D. North Carolina·Decided July 26, 2023·No. 1:22-cv-00022·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA ASHEVILLE DIVISION 1:22-cv-00022-RJC

TAMARA NOLEN, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) Order COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, ) ) Defendant. ) ) )

THIS MATTER is before the Court on the Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees Under the Equal Access to Justice Act (Doc. No. 18). By stipulation of the parties (Doc. No. 19), the Court orders as follows: 1. The Social Security Administration shall pay $5,400.00 in attorney’s fees to the Plaintiff in full settlement and satisfaction of any and all claims for attorney’s fees for legal services rendered under the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d). Additionally, the Plaintiff shall be paid $402.00 in costs from the Judgment Fund by the U.S. Department of Treasury pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2412(a)(1). 2. With respect to the Plaintiff’s signed assignment of EAJA fees to her attorney, in accordance with Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586 (2010), the Commissioner will determine whether the Plaintiff owes a debt to the United States. If so, the debt will be satisfied first and, if any funds remain, they will be made payable to the Plaintiff and mailed to the Plaintiff’s counsel. If the Department of the Treasury reports to the Commissioner that the Plaintiff does not owe a federal debt, the government will exercise its discretion and honor the assignment of EAJA fees and pay the awarded fees directly to the Plaintiff’s counsel. IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the Plaintiff's Motion for Attorney’s Fees (Doc. No. 18) is GRANTED.

Signed: July 25, 2023

Robert J. Conrad, Jr. 9, United States District Judge “ee

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

Nolen v. Commissioner of Social Security, (W.D.N.C. 2023).

Nolen v. Commissioner of Social Security (Nolen 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)