BYRD v. COLVIN, 5:13-120-RMG. (2014)
Court: District Court, D. South Carolina
Number: infdco20140717c79
Visitors: 21
Filed: Jul. 16, 2014
Latest Update: Jul. 16, 2014
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 award of$4,032.95, representing 8.25 hours of attorney time at $181.25 per hour and 28 hours of paralegal time at $90.63 per hour. (Dkt. No. 22-6 at 10). The Commissioner has advised the Court she does not oppose Plaintiff's motion. (Dkt. No. 23). The Court has rev
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 award of$4,032.95, representing 8.25 hours of attorney time at $181.25 per hour and 28 hours of paralegal time at $90.63 per hour. (Dkt. No. 22-6 at 10). The Commissioner has advised the Court she does not oppose Plaintiff's motion. (Dkt. No. 23). The Court has revi..
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 award of$4,032.95, representing 8.25 hours of attorney time at $181.25 per hour and 28 hours of paralegal time at $90.63 per hour. (Dkt. No. 22-6 at 10). 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 award to Plaintiff in the amount of $4,032.95. This award is subject to the Treasury Offset Program, 31 U.S.C. § 3716(c)(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
