ACEVEDO
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.
The court granted the unopposed petition for attorney fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act, awarding $5,434.66.
Plaintiff sought attorney fees under the EAJA after prevailing in a Social Security case. The defendant did not oppose the petition, and the plaintiff…
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 Assignment Of Eaja Fees cases and more on FLexlaw
This cause is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Unopposed Petition for Attorney Fees (Doc. No. 31; “Petition”) and attached Memorandum of Law in Support of Plaintiff’s Unopposed Petition for Attorney Fees (Doc. No. 31-2; “Memo”), both filed October 7, 2022. In the Petition, Plaintiff seeks an award of attorney’s fees pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”) in the amount of $5,434.66. Petition at 1-2; see also Memo at 1, 4. Defendant does not oppose the relief requested. See Petition at 2. According to the Petition and supporting documentation, Plaintiff’s counsel expended a total of 24.70 hours in the representation of Plaintiff before the Court: 22.80 hours in 2021 and 1.90 hours in 2022. Id.; see also Schedule of Hours (Doc. No. 31-1). Plaintiff requests an hourly rate of $218.94 for the 2021 hours and $233.07 for the 2022 hours. Petition at 2. Plaintiff is seeking a higher hourly rate than the $125 specified by statute based on the increase in the cost of living since 1996, when the attorney’s fee rate was last adjusted by Congress. See 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(2)(A) (permitting fee awards at rates higher than $125 per hour upon the Court’s determination that cost of living has increased). Having examined the Consumer Price Index and the representations made in the Petition, the Court concludes an increase in inflation does justify a proportionate increase in attorney’s fees.1 Further, the number of hours expended is reasonable. Plaintiff has assigned his rights to any entitlement of attorney’s fees due under the EAJA to his counsel. See Assignment of EAJA Fees (Doc. No. 31-3). Regarding the assignment, Plaintiff represents the following: The parties agree that after the Court issues an order awarding EAJA fees to Plaintiff, the Commissioner will determine whether Plaintiff owes a debt to the government. If the U.S. Department of the Treasury determines that Plaintiff does not owe a federal debt, the government will accept Plaintiff’s assignment of EAJA fees and pay fees directly to Plaintiff’s counsel.
Petition at 2; see also Memo at 4.
GRANTED.
2. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant for attorney’s fees in the amount of $5,434.66 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d). 3. The Commissioner may exercise the discretion to honor Plaintiffs assignment of fees to counsel if the U.S. Department of Treasury determines that Plaintiff does not owe a debt to the U.S. Government. DONE AND ORDERED in Jacksonville, Florida on October 12, 2022.
amnme RK. Kirt
JAMES R. KLINDT
United States Magistrate Judge kaw Copies to: Counsel of Record