GRIFFEN COOK, APPELLANT,
v.
MARGARET HECKLER, SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, APPELLEE

8th Cir. | 1984-12-26
No. 83-2681
751 F.2d 240 United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit (1984) Positive Treatment
Cited by 18 cases

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.


Holding

A Social Security claimant who obtains a remand for further administrative proceedings, but not the actual receipt of benefits, is not a "prevailing party" entitled to attorney fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act.


Facts & Procedural History

Appellant Cook sought disability benefits and previously won a remand from the Eighth Circuit for further administrative consideration. Cook then move…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court
HENLEY, Senior Circuit Judge.

HENLEY, Senior Circuit Judge.

On July 27, 1984 we reversed a decision of the district court upholding a final decision of the Secretary of Health and Human Services denying appellant Cook’s claim for disability benefits and directed remand to the Secretary for further administrative consideration. Cook v. Heckler, 739 F. 2d 396 (8th Cir.1984).

Cook now has filed his motion for costs and attorney fees alleging entitlement pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412. The Secretary has responded to that motion and Cook has replied to the Secretary’s response.

By now it is clear that a prevailing party may recover attorney fees and costs under the EAJA where the position of the government was not substantially justified. Cornella v. Schweiker, 728 F. 2d 978 (8th Cir.1984). However, for purposes of an attorney fee award under EAJA it is not enough for a Social Security claimant to have won a remand to the Secretary for further administrative proceedings on the merits. It is the receipt of those benefits that renders a typical Social Security claimant a prevailing party. Brown v. Secretary of Health & Human Services, 747 F. 2d 878 (3d Cir.1984); McGill v. Secretary of Health & Human Services, 712 F. 2d 28, 32 (2d Cir.1983). Cf. Hanrahan v. Hampton, 446 U.S. 754, 100 S.Ct. 1987, 64 L.Ed.2d 670 (1980).

We join the Second and Third Circuits and thus hold that appellant here may not recover attorney fees and costs under the EAJA since he is not a “prevailing” party within the contemplation of that Act.

However, since Cook did win the appeal to the extent of securing a reversal and remand, he may recover the costs of the appeal as those costs are specifically allowable by statute or rule of court. See 28 U.S.C. § 2412(a); FRAP 39; 28 U.S.C. § 1920; Cornelia v. Schweiker, 741 F. 2d 170, 172 (8th Cir.1984). In all other respects the application for attorney fees and costs must be denied.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw