Williams v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration

D. South Carolina

Williams v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration

District Court, D. South Carolina·Decided September 30, 2019·No. 1:17-cv-01077-TLW·Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA AIKEN DIVISION Lorriann Williams, Civil Action No. 1:17-cv-01077-TLW

Plaintiff, v. ORDER Nancy A. Berryhill, Acting Commissioner of Social Security Administration,

Defendant.

This matter is before the Court for review of Counsel for Plaintiff’s motion for attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412. ECF No. 28. The Commissioner filed a notice that the government does not object to EAJA fees in the amount of four thousand seven hundred thirty-nine dollars and forty-four cents ($4,739.44) in attorney’s fees and sixteen dollars ($16.00) in expenses. ECF No. 29. The attorney’s fees are based upon a remand to the Commissioner for further administrative action in this case. Under the EAJA, a court shall award attorney’s fees to a prevailing party in certain civil actions against the United States unless the court finds that the government’s position was substantially justified or special circumstances make an award unjust. 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(1)(A). To determine whether the Commissioner was “substantially justified” in denying social security benefits and thus whether an award of attorney’s fees under the EAJA is warranted, the court asks whether there was arguably substantial evidence to support the Commissioner’s position. Anderson v. Heckler, 756 F.2d 1011 (4th Cir. 1984). An EAJA attorney’s fees award is payable to the litigant and, therefore, is subject to an offset to satisfy the litigant’s pre-existing debt to the Government. Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586, 594 (2010). After careful consideration of the record and the applicable legal authority, the Court concludes that the requested fees should be awarded. As noted, the Commissioner does not object to the amounts of $4,739.44 and $16.00, to be offset by the amount of Plaintiff’s pre-existing federal debts. See Astrue, 560 U.S. at 594.

Having reviewed the filings and being fully advised, it is ORDERED that the motion for attorney’s fees under the EAJA, 28 U.S.C. § 2412, ECF No. 28, is GRANTED, and the Commissioner is ordered to award Plaintiff $4,755.44, offset by his pre-existing federal debts, for all legal services rendered on behalf of Plaintiff by counsel in connection with this civil action. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Terry L. Wooten Terry L. Wooten Senior United States District Judge

September 30, 2019 Columbia, South Carolina

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA AIKEN DIVISION Lorriann Williams, Civil Action No. 1:17-cv-01077-TLW

Plaintiff, v. ORDER Nancy A. Berryhill, Acting Commissioner of Social Security Administration,

Defendant.

This matter is before the Court for review of Counsel for Plaintiff’s motion for attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412. ECF No. 28. The Commissioner filed a notice that the government does not object to EAJA fees in the amount of four thousand seven hundred thirty-nine dollars and forty-four cents ($4,739.44) in attorney’s fees and sixteen dollars ($16.00) in expenses. ECF No. 29. The attorney’s fees are based upon a remand to the Commissioner for further administrative action in this case. Under the EAJA, a court shall award attorney’s fees to a prevailing party in certain civil actions against the United States unless the court finds that the government’s position was substantially justified or special circumstances make an award unjust. 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(1)(A). To determine whether the Commissioner was “substantially justified” in denying social security benefits and thus whether an award of attorney’s fees under the EAJA is warranted, the court asks whether there was arguably substantial evidence to support the Commissioner’s position. Anderson v. Heckler, 756 F.2d 1011 (4th Cir. 1984). An EAJA attorney’s fees award is payable to the litigant and, therefore, is subject to an offset to satisfy the litigant’s pre-existing debt to the Government. Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586, 594 (2010). After careful consideration of the record and the applicable legal authority, the Court concludes that the requested fees should be awarded. As noted, the Commissioner does not object to the amounts of $4,739.44 and $16.00, to be offset by the amount of Plaintiff’s pre-existing federal debts. See Astrue, 560 U.S. at 594.

Having reviewed the filings and being fully advised, it is ORDERED that the motion for attorney’s fees under the EAJA, 28 U.S.C. § 2412, ECF No. 28, is GRANTED, and the Commissioner is ordered to award Plaintiff $4,755.44, offset by his pre-existing federal debts, for all legal services rendered on behalf of Plaintiff by counsel in connection with this civil action. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Terry L. Wooten Terry L. Wooten Senior United States District Judge

September 30, 2019 Columbia, South Carolina

Williams v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration, (D.S.C. 2019).

Pincite

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

Opinion

Related