Taylor v. Social Security Administration Commissioner

District Court, W.D. Arkansas·Decided May 11, 2023·No. 2:22-cv-02052·Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS FORT SMITH DIVISION

MARK EDWARD TAYLOR PLAINTIFF

V. CASE NO. 2:22-CV-2052

COMMISSIONER, SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION DEFENDANT

ORDER The Court has received proposed findings and recommendations (Doc. 23) from United States Magistrate Judge Mark E. Ford. There have been no objections. After careful review, the Court concludes that the findings and recommendations should be, and hereby are, approved and adopted as this Court’s findings in all respects in their entirety. Accordingly, the Court ORDERS that Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorney Fees (Doc. 21) be GRANTED and finds that Plaintiff is entitled to an award under the EAJA in the total amount of $7,189.30. This amount should be paid in addition to, and not out of, any past due benefits which Plaintiff may be awarded in the future. Pursuant to Astrue v. Ratliff, 130 S. Ct. 2521, 2528 (2010), the EAJA award should be made payable to Plaintiff, but may be mailed to Plaintiff’s counsel. IT IS SO ORDERED this May 11, 2023.

/s/P. K. Holmes III

P. K. HOLMES III U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE

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

Taylor v. Social Security Administration Commissioner, (W.D. Ark. 2023).

Taylor v. Social Security Administration Commissioner (Taylor v. Social Security Administration Commissioner) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Astrue v. Ratliff
560 U.S. 586 (Supreme Court, 2010)