Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

MONTOYA v. COLVIN, 13-cv-02272-WYD. (2015)

Court: District Court, D. Colorado Number: infdco20150707909 Visitors: 6
Filed: Jul. 06, 2015
Latest Update: Jul. 06, 2015
Summary: ORDER WILEY Y. DANIEL , Senior District Judge . THIS MATTER comes before the Court upon Plaintiff's Motion for Award of Attorneys' Fees Pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. 2412 filed June 26, 2015 (seeking $5,649.00 in fees) and the Parties' Stipulation Re: Plaintiff's Motion for Attorney Fees Pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act ["EAJA"] filed July 6, 2015. In the Stipulation, the parties agree to an award of $5,300 in attorney fees. The Court, having reviewed t
More

ORDER

THIS MATTER comes before the Court upon Plaintiff's Motion for Award of Attorneys' Fees Pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412 filed June 26, 2015 (seeking $5,649.00 in fees) and the Parties' Stipulation Re: Plaintiff's Motion for Attorney Fees Pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act ["EAJA"] filed July 6, 2015. In the Stipulation, the parties agree to an award of $5,300 in attorney fees. The Court, having reviewed the Motion and Stipulation and being fully advised in the premises,

ORDERS that the Stipulation Re: Plaintiff's Motion for Attorney Fees Pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (ECF No. 23) is APPROVED. In accordance therewith, it is

ORDERED that Plaintiff is awarded $5,300.00 in attorney fees pursuant to the EAJA. Payment of this amount shall constitute a complete release from and bar to any and all claims Plaintiff may have relating to EAJA fees and costs in connection with this action. This award shall not be used as precedent in any future cases, nor be construed as a concession by the Commissioner that the original administrative decision denying benefits to Plaintiff was not substantially justified. It is

FURTHER ORDERED that the EAJA award is without prejudice to Plaintiff's attorneys' right to seek attorney fees pursuant to Section 206(b) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 406(b), subject to the offset provisions of the EAJA. See 28 U.S.C. § 2412(c)(1) (2006). It is

FURTHER ORDERED that if, after receiving the Court's EAJA fee order, the Commissioner (1) determines upon effectuation of the Court's EAJA fee order that Plaintiff does not owe a debt that is subject to offset under the Treasury Offset Program, and (2) agrees to waive the requirements of the Anti-Assignment Act, the fees will be made payable to Plaintiff's attorney. However, if there is a debt owed under the Treasury Offset Program, the Commissioner cannot agree to waive the requirements of the Anti-Assignment Act, and the remaining EAJA fees after offset will be paid by a check made out to Plaintiff but delivered to Plaintiff's attorney. Finally, in light of the Stipulation, it is

ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion for Award of Attorneys' Fees Pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412 (ECF No. 22) is DENIED AS MOOT.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer