HOOPER
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.
This is an order granting plaintiff's unopposed motion for attorney's fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act following the court's reversal and remand of a Social Security benefits denial. The court awarded $7,000 in attorney's fees and $405.00 in costs, with payment to be made directly to plaintiff's counsel unless plaintiff owes a federal debt.
The court held that plaintiff is a prevailing party entitled to attorney's fees and costs under the EAJA. Plaintiff was awarded $7,000 in attorney's fees and $405.00 in costs, payable by the government directly to plaintiff's counsel unless plaintiff owes a federal debt.
[1] A party who obtains a sentence-four remand order under 42 U.S.C. …
[2] Attorney's fees may be awarded under the Equal Access to Justice Act to a prevailing party in an action against the Commissioner of Social Security.
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”
The court cited Shalala v. Schaefer to establish that plaintiff qualifies as a prevailing party entitled to EAJA fees.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe court had previously entered an order on September 5, 2024, reversing and remanding the Commissioner of Social Security's decision to the administ…
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 Sentence Four Remand cases and more on FLexlaw
This cause comes before the Court on Plaintiff's Unopposed Motion for Attorney's Fees. (Doc. 16). By the Motion, Plaintiff seeks attorney's fees in the amount of $7,000 and costs in the amount of $405.00 pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d). On September 5, 2024, this Court entered an Order reversing and remanding the case to the Commissioner for further administrative proceedings. (Doc. 13). Thereafter, the Clerk entered judgment in favor of Plaintiff. (Doc. 14).
As the prevailing party, Plaintiff now requests an award of attorney's fees. See 28 U.S.C. § 2412(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 issuance of an order awarding EAJA fees, the United States
Department of the Treasury will determine whether Plaintiff owes a debt to the government. If Plaintiff has no discernable federal debt, the government will accept Plaintiff's assignment of EAJA fees and pay the fees directly to Plaintiff's counsel.
The Commissioner does not oppose the requested relief. (Doc. 16, at 1). Additionally, Plaintiff and Plaintiff's attorney filed affidavits in support of the motion. (Docs. 16-1, 16-3). Therefore, for the reasons set out in Plaintiff's motion and supported by the affidavits, it is hereby
ORDERED:
1. Plaintiff's Unopposed Motion for Attorney's Fees (Doc. 16) is
GRANTED.
2. Plaintiff is awarded fees in the amount of $7,000 and costs in the amount of $405.00. Unless the Department of Treasury determines that Plaintiff owes a federal debt, the government must pay the fees and costs to Plaintiff's counsel in accordance with Plaintiff's assignment. (Docs. 16-2, 16-5).
DONE AND ORDERED in Tampa, Florida, on this 24th day of September 2024.
ANTHONY E. PORCELLI
United States Magistrate Judge
cc: Counsel of Record