EVANS
v.
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY
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.
The Court granted Plaintiff's petition for attorney fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act, awarding $4,837.00.
Plaintiff sought attorney fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) after obtaining a sentence four reversal of a denial of benefits. The Comm…
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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Market Rates cases and more on FLexlaw
ORDER1
THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Consent Petition for Attorney Fees (“Motion”) (Doc. 32). Plaintiff makes a timely request for an award of attorney’s fees in the amount of $4,837.00 pursuant to Section 2412(d) of the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d). (Doc. 32 at 1.) For the reasons stated herein, the Motion is due to be GRANTED. EAJA sets forth the following requirements for the award of fees: Except as otherwise specifically provided by statute, a court shall award to a prevailing party other than the United States fees and other expenses . . . incurred by that party in any civil action . . . , including proceedings for judicial review of agency action, brought by or against the United States in any court having jurisdiction of that
Defendant’s position was substantially justified. Further, there are no special circumstances that would make the award unjust. In addition, the Motion provides that Plaintiff’s net worth when this proceeding was filed was less than two million dollars. (Doc. 32 at 2.) Thus, an award of attorney’s fees under EAJA is appropriate.
Regarding the amount of attorney’s fees to be awarded, EAJA requires that the fees be “reasonable.” 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(2)(A). In explanation of this standard, EAJA reads: The amount of fees awarded . . . shall be based upon prevailing market rates for the kind and quality of the services furnished . . . [and] attorney fees shall not be awarded in excess of $125 per hour unless the court determines that an increase in the cost of living or a special factor, such as the limited availability of qualified attorneys for the proceedings involved, justifies a higher fee. Id. The Motion reflects that Plaintiff’s counsel’s rate was $207.78 per hour for work done in 2020 and $213.74 per hour for work done in 2021 and 2022. (Doc. 32 at 2.) As the attorney rates are higher than the statutory maximum, Plaintiff’s counsel is seeking a cost of living adjustment. (Id.) Considering the lack of opposition, the Court finds these hourly rates reasonable and the cost of living adjustment warranted.2 The Court also finds reasonable the number of hours spent by Plaintiff’s counsel on the case. (See id. & Doc. 32-2 at 1.) Thus, the Court finds that $4,837.00 (($207.78 x 2.5 hours) + ($213.74 x 20.2 hours)) is a reasonable amount for attorney’s fees in this case. Accordingly, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED: 1. The Motion (Doc. 32) is GRANTED. 2. The Clerk of Court shall enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant in the amount of $4,837.00 for attorney’s fees.
3. The Commissioner will determine whether Plaintiff owes a debt to the government. If the United States Department of the Treasury determines that Plaintiff does not owe such a debt, the government will accept Plaintiff’s assignment of EAJA fees and pay the fees directly to Plaintiff’s counsel.
OH B. TOOMEY
United States Magistrate Judge
Copies to: Counsel of Record