Susan E. Allen v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of Arizona considers Susan E. Allen’s application for attorney’s fees and expenses under the Equal Access to Justice Act following the Ninth Circuit’s reversal and remand of the Commissioner of Social Security’s decision. The court finds that Allen was the prevailing party and that the Commissioner’s position was not substantially justified. The court awards $31,962.34 in fees and expenses after reducing compensation for clerical work.

Holdings

1. A Social Security claimant whose denial of benefits is reversed and remanded is a prevailing party for EAJA purposes, regardless of whether benefits are ultimately awarded; Plaintiff therefore qualified as a prevailing party.
2. The Commissioner failed to establish that its position was substantially justified because the Ninth Circuit held that the ALJ's rejection of Plaintiff's testimony and treating physician's opinion was unsupported by substantial evidence, and the Commissioner did not show that this was the decidedly unusual case in which the government's position was nevertheless substantially justified.
3. Plaintiff was entitled to $31,962.34 in EAJA attorneys' fees and $1,007.00 in costs after reductions for clerical paralegal and attorney work, but without the additional reductions sought for appellate briefing or reply-brief preparation.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Plaintiff was a prevailing party eligible to seek attorneys' fees under the EAJA after the Ninth Circuit reversed and remanded the denial of benefits.
2. Whether the Commissioner's position was substantially justified under the EAJA.
3. Whether Plaintiff's requested attorneys' fees and costs were reasonable, including fees for paralegal clerical work, attorney clerical work, appellate briefing, and preparation of the fee reply.

Disposition

other