Sutton v. Berryhill, 8:17-2065-RMG. (2018)
Court: District Court, D. South Carolina
Number: infdco20181227896
Visitors: 21
Filed: Dec. 26, 2018
Latest Update: Dec. 26, 2018
Summary: ORDER RICHARD MARK GERGEL , District Judge . This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff's motion for an award of attorney's fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act ("EAJA"), 28 U.S.C. 2412. (Dkt. No. 22). Plaintiff seeks an fee award of $3,729.69 in fees BS $20.01 in expenses. The Commissioner has advised the Court she does not oppose Plaintiff's motion. (Dkt. No. 23). The Court has reviewed the motion and memorandum of Plaintiff, as well as the supporting underlying documentatio
Summary: ORDER RICHARD MARK GERGEL , District Judge . This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff's motion for an award of attorney's fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act ("EAJA"), 28 U.S.C. 2412. (Dkt. No. 22). Plaintiff seeks an fee award of $3,729.69 in fees BS $20.01 in expenses. The Commissioner has advised the Court she does not oppose Plaintiff's motion. (Dkt. No. 23). The Court has reviewed the motion and memorandum of Plaintiff, as well as the supporting underlying documentation..
More
ORDER
RICHARD MARK GERGEL, District Judge.
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff's motion for an award of attorney's fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act ("EAJA"), 28 U.S.C. § 2412. (Dkt. No. 22). Plaintiff seeks an fee award of $3,729.69 in fees BS $20.01 in expenses. The Commissioner has advised the Court she does not oppose Plaintiff's motion. (Dkt. No. 23).
The Court has reviewed the motion and memorandum of Plaintiff, as well as the supporting underlying documentation, and finds that the total fee request, hours expended, and hourly rates are reasonable and authorized under applicable law. Gisbrecht v. Barnhart, 535 U.S. 789 (2002). Therefore, the Court hereby grants an EAJA fee award to Plaintiff in the amount of $3,729.69 in fees and $20.01 in expenses. This award is subject to the Treasury Offset Program, 31 U.S.C. § 3716(c)(1)(B). In the event Plaintiff has no present debt subject to offset and Plaintiff has executed a proper assignment to her counsel, Defendant is directed to make the payment due herein to Plaintiff's counsel. If Plaintiff has no present debt subject to offset and no proper assignment has been made by Plaintiff to her counsel, Defendant is directed to make the check due pursuant to this Order payable to Plaintiff and to deliver the check to Plaintiff's counsel.
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
