Huffstetler v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration, 5:18-cv-03023-RBH. (2019)
Court: District Court, D. South Carolina
Number: infdco20190813e70
Visitors: 4
Filed: Aug. 12, 2019
Latest Update: Aug. 12, 2019
Summary: ORDER R. BRYAN HARWELL , District Judge . On July 24, 2019, Plaintiff filed a motion for attorney's fees pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act ("EAJA"), 42 U.S.C. 2412, on the basis that the position taken by the defendant in this action was not substantially justified. In the motion, Plaintiff requested attorney's fees in the amount of $2,906.35 and $20.64 in expenses. On August 8, 2019, Defendant filed a response in support indicating no objection to Plaintiff's requested EAJA awa
Summary: ORDER R. BRYAN HARWELL , District Judge . On July 24, 2019, Plaintiff filed a motion for attorney's fees pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act ("EAJA"), 42 U.S.C. 2412, on the basis that the position taken by the defendant in this action was not substantially justified. In the motion, Plaintiff requested attorney's fees in the amount of $2,906.35 and $20.64 in expenses. On August 8, 2019, Defendant filed a response in support indicating no objection to Plaintiff's requested EAJA awar..
More
ORDER
R. BRYAN HARWELL, District Judge.
On July 24, 2019, Plaintiff filed a motion for attorney's fees pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act ("EAJA"), 42 U.S.C. § 2412, on the basis that the position taken by the defendant in this action was not substantially justified. In the motion, Plaintiff requested attorney's fees in the amount of $2,906.35 and $20.64 in expenses. On August 8, 2019, Defendant filed a response in support indicating no objection to Plaintiff's requested EAJA award.
Based on the foregoing and after considering the briefs and materials submitted by the parties, the court orders the Defendant to pay the sum of $2,906.35 for attorney's fees and $20.64 in expenses, pursuant to EAJA, subject to the Treasury Offset Program if the prevailing party owes a debt to the federal government. However, the payment shall be made payable to the claimant pursuant to Astrue v. Ratliff, 130 S.Ct. 2521 (2010) and mailed to his attorney, with a copy to the claimant.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
