HARRIS

v.

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY

M.D. Fla. | 2023-06-26

No. 8:22-cv-323

District Court, M.D. Florida (2023)

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.

Holding

Plaintiff's motion for attorney's fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act is granted, and fees are awarded to be paid directly to plaintiff's counsel.

Facts & Procedural History

Plaintiff sought attorney's fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act after the court remanded her Social Security case. The Commissioner did not opp…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Topics

Equal Access To Justice Act Prevailing Party Attorney'S Fees

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Equal Access To Justice Act cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court

Before me is Plaintiff’s Uncontested Motion for Attorney’s Fees Under the Equal Access to Justice Act (doc. 24). Plaintiff seeks payment of attorney’s fees in the amount of $5,297.46 pursuant to the EAJA.¹ On March 23, 2023, I entered an Order remanding Plaintiff’s case to the Commissioner for further administrative proceedings (doc. 18); the Clerk of Court entered judgment in Plaintiff’s favor on the following day (doc. 19).2

MARK A. PIZZO

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Footnotes

1 Attorney Suzanne Harris requests fees for 22.5 hours of work at the hourly rate of $234.95 for attorney work performed in 2022 and at the hourly rate of $242.34 for attorney work performed in 2023 (doc. 24-2).

2 The plaintiff in a social security case has 30 days beyond the 60-day appeal window to apply for fees and other expenses under the EAJA, for a total of 90 days after judgment. See 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(1)(B), (d)(2)(G); Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B); Gates v. Barnhart, 325 F. Supp. 2d 1342, 1343 (M.D. Fla. 2002). In this case, Plaintiff timely filed her application for fees on June 26, 2023 (doc. 24). In Reeves v. Astrue, 526 F. 3d 732 (11th Cir. 2008), the Eleventh Circuit held that an EAJA fee award is awarded to the “prevailing party,” not to counsel. However, in this case, Plaintiff has agreed to assign the EAJA award to her counsel (doc. 24-1). The Commissioner does not oppose Plaintiff's motion. Therefore, by virtue of the fee assignment and Defendant’s lack of opposition, the award is payable to Plaintiff's counsel. Accordingly, it is ORDERED: 1. Plaintiff's Uncontested Motion for Attorney’s Fees pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (doc. 24) is GRANTED; and 2. Plaintiff is awarded attorney’s fees in the amount of $5,297.46 to be paid directly to Plaintiff's counsel, if Plaintiff does not owe a debt to the Government.’ DONE AND ORDERED at Tampa, Florida on June 26, 2023.

3 The Commissioner will determine whether Plaintiff owes a debt to the government. If she does, fees shall be made payable to Plaintiff and delivered to Plaintiff's counsel to satisfy the debt.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Authorities Cited

Gates v. Barnhart, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12462 (M.D. Fla. 2002)
Maxie D. Reeves v. Astrue, 526 F.3d 732 (11th Cir. 2008)

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw