JOHNSON v. COLVIN, 3:14-cv-94-MSH. (2015)
Court: District Court, M.D. Georgia
Number: infdco20150701d18
Visitors: 8
Filed: Jun. 30, 2015
Latest Update: Jun. 30, 2015
Summary: ORDER Social Security Appeal STEPHEN HYLES , Magistrate Judge . Presently pending before the Court is Plaintiff's Motion for Attorney's Fees Pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act. (ECF No. 18.) Counsel filed his motion for fees on June 4, 2015, requesting $4,609.64 for 24.6 total attorney work hours at a rate calculated for the date that the time was billed. Pl.'s Mem. in Supp. of Mot. for Attorney's Fees 4, ECF No. 18-2. The Commissioner filed a Response wherein she does not object
Summary: ORDER Social Security Appeal STEPHEN HYLES , Magistrate Judge . Presently pending before the Court is Plaintiff's Motion for Attorney's Fees Pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act. (ECF No. 18.) Counsel filed his motion for fees on June 4, 2015, requesting $4,609.64 for 24.6 total attorney work hours at a rate calculated for the date that the time was billed. Pl.'s Mem. in Supp. of Mot. for Attorney's Fees 4, ECF No. 18-2. The Commissioner filed a Response wherein she does not object ..
More
ORDER
Social Security Appeal
STEPHEN HYLES, Magistrate Judge.
Presently pending before the Court is Plaintiff's Motion for Attorney's Fees Pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act. (ECF No. 18.) Counsel filed his motion for fees on June 4, 2015, requesting $4,609.64 for 24.6 total attorney work hours at a rate calculated for the date that the time was billed. Pl.'s Mem. in Supp. of Mot. for Attorney's Fees 4, ECF No. 18-2. The Commissioner filed a Response wherein she does not object to the request for or amount of fees. Comm'r's Resp. 1, ECF No. 19.
Given that there is no objection to the amount of fees, number of hours requested, or hourly rate, and that the Court finds the request reasonable, Plaintiff's request for fees in the amount of $4,609.64 is hereby GRANTED. These amounts shall be paid directly to the Plaintiff. See 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(1)(A); Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586, 130 S.Ct. 2521, 2525-26 (2010); Reeves v. Astrue, 526 F.3d 732, 735 (11th Cir. 2008) (explaining that the EAJA "unambiguously directs the award of attorney's fees to the party who incurred those fees and not to the party's attorney").
SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
