HANSEN
v.
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Hansen, the prevailing party in a Social Security Administration appeal, seeks attorney's fees under the Equal Access of Justice Act (EAJA). The court grants her unopposed motion for $7,800 in EAJA fees following a successful remand order from the Commissioner.
Hansen is entitled to an award of $7,800 in attorney's fees under the EAJA as the prevailing party in the remand action. Unless the Department of Treasury determines that Hansen owes a pre-existing federal debt, the defendant must pay the fees directly to Hansen's counsel pursuant to her fee assignment.
[1] A party who obtains a favorable decision from the Commissioner on remand pursuant to 42 U.S.C. …
[2] A party who wins a sentence-four remand order under 42 U.S.C. …
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“a party who wins a sentence-four remand order under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) is a prevailing party”
Establishes that Hansen qualifies as a prevailing party entitled to EAJA fees under Shalala v. Schaefer
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceHansen obtained a remand order from the Commissioner of Social Security on September 18, 2024, under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). Following the remand, the Cle…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Offset For Federal Debt cases and more on FLexlaw
The plaintiff Jamie Leigh Hansen moves unopposed for an award of $7,800.00 in attorney’s fees as the prevailing party under the Equal Access of Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d). Doc. 17. A September 18, 2024, order grants the Commissioner’s unopposed motion to remand under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). Doc. 13. The Clerk subsequently entered judgment in favor of Hansen. Doc. 15. As the prevailing party, Hansen now seeks an award of attorney’s fees under the EAJA. See 28 U.S.C. § 2414(d)(1)(A); cf. Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292, 300-02 (1993) (concluding that a party who wins a sentence-four remand order under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) is a prevailing party), superseded by rule on other grounds, Fed. R. Civ. P. 58(c)(2)(B). After an order awarding EAJA fees, the United States Department of the Treasury determines whether Hansen owes a debt to the government. See Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586, 592–93 (2010) (“A § 2412(d)(1)(A) attorney's fees award is payable to the litigant and is therefore subject to an offset to satisfy the litigant's preexisting debt to the Government.”). Absent a federal debt, the government will accept her assignment of EAJA fees and pay the fees directly to her counsel. The Commissioner consents to the requested relief. Additionally, Hansen’s counsel files an itemized billing statement in support of the petition. Doc. 17-1. Therefore, for the reasons stated by Hansen, the motion for attorney fees under the EAJA, Doc. 17, is GRANTED. Hansen shall receive $7,800.00 in attorney’s fees under the EAJA. Unless the Department of Treasury determines that Hansen owes a federal debt, the defendant must pay the fees to Hansen’s counsel in accord with Hansen’s assignment of fees. See Doc. 17-2. ORDERED on this 17th day of January, 2025.
)
NDSAY S. GRIBF
United States Magistrate Judge