Summary
The United States District Court for the District of Kansas grants plaintiff G.R.A.'s motion for attorney fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act following a sentence-four remand in a Social Security benefits case. The court awards $3,900 in attorney fees and permits plaintiff to seek $405 in costs by filing a bill of costs within 30 days. The order also addresses payment to the plaintiff, potential offsets for federal debts, and any future fee award under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b).
Holdings
- A Social Security claimant who obtains a sentence-four remand order from a federal district court under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) is a prevailing party for purposes of the EAJA.
- Plaintiff satisfied the EAJA requirements concerning substantial justification and special circumstances because the Commissioner did not oppose the motion, did not carry the burden of showing substantial justification, and did not identify any circumstance making the award unjust.
- The requested $3,900 attorney-fee award was reasonable because counsel documented 17.7 hours, the calculated amount at the inflation-adjusted statutory rate was higher than the amount requested, and the requested amount was reasonably reduced.
- An EAJA attorney-fee award is payable to the plaintiff as the litigant and may be offset against qualifying pre-existing debts owed by the plaintiff to the United States; if counsel later receives fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b), counsel must refund the smaller award to plaintiff.
- Plaintiff may recover $405 in EAJA costs by filing a bill of costs within 30 days of the order.
Questions Presented
- Whether plaintiff qualified as a prevailing party for purposes of an EAJA fee award after obtaining a sentence-four remand under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).
- Whether the government's position was substantially justified and whether any special circumstances made an EAJA fee award unjust.
- Whether plaintiff's requested attorney fees of $3,900 were reasonable in light of the hours worked and hourly rate.
- Whether plaintiff could recover $405 in costs under the EAJA by filing a bill of costs within 30 days.
Disposition
granted
Cases Cited (10)
- Hackett v. Barnhart, 475 F.3d 1166, 1168, 1172 (10th Cir. 2007)(followed)
- Hwang v. O’Malley, No. 23-cv-124 DBP, 2024 WL 5041115, at *1 (D. Utah Dec. 9, 2024)(followed by analogy)
- Gallaway v. Astrue, 297 F. App’x 807, 809 (10th Cir. 2008)(followed)
- Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424, 437 (1983)(followed)
- Roxanne C. v. Colvin, No. CV C23-233 GBW, 2025 WL 89295, at *3 (D.N.M. Jan. 14, 2025)(relied upon)
- Lori A. v. Kijakazi, No. 21-cv-00101-JCB, 2023 WL 2403677, at *4 (D. Utah Mar. 8, 2023)(relied upon)
- Hardister v. Kijakazi, No. 21-cv-50 DBP, 2022 WL 2304284, at *3 (D. Utah June 27, 2022)(relied upon)
- Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586 (2010)(followed)
- Weakley v. Bowen, 803 F.2d 575, 580 (10th Cir. 1986)(followed)
- Fruitt v. Astrue, 604 F.3d 1217, 1220–21 (10th Cir. 2010)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…