Stephanie D. v. Commissioner of Social Security

Stephanie D. · United States District Court for the Western District of New York · January 22, 2026 · No. 1:22-cv-0788-JJM

Summary

The United States District Court for the Western District of New York approved a stipulated award of attorney’s fees and costs under the Equal Access to Justice Act following remand of the plaintiff’s Social Security benefits case. The court awarded $7,590.00 in attorney’s fees and $402.00 in costs, subject to federal debt offset and the Anti-Assignment Act. The fees were payable to plaintiff’s counsel if the government permitted assignment.

Holdings

  1. A plaintiff who obtains a remand under the circumstances presented is a prevailing party for purposes of the Equal Access to Justice Act.
  2. A stipulation between the parties does not relieve the court of its obligation to determine whether an EAJA fee amount is reasonable.
  3. The fee award was appropriate because the government did not establish that its position was substantially justified and the court found no special circumstances making an award unjust.
  4. The stipulated award of $7,590.00 in attorney's fees, based on 31.0 hours and an effective hourly rate of $244.84, was reasonable and could be approved.
  5. The EAJA award could be paid to plaintiff's counsel pursuant to plaintiff's assignment if the government waived application of the Anti-Assignment Act and plaintiff owed no federal debt subject to Treasury offset; otherwise, the award was payable to plaintiff but delivered to counsel.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether plaintiff was a prevailing party entitled to seek attorney's fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act after obtaining a remand.
  2. Whether the government established that its position was substantially justified or that special circumstances made an EAJA award unjust.
  3. Whether the stipulated attorney's fee amount and documented hours were reasonable.
  4. Whether the fee award could be paid to plaintiff's counsel pursuant to plaintiff's assignment, subject to the Anti-Assignment Act and Treasury offset.

Disposition

other

Cases Cited (7)

  • Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292, 300-02 (1993)(followed)
  • Pribek v. Secretary, Department of Health & Human Services, 717 F. Supp. 73, 75 (W.D.N.Y. 1989)(followed)
  • Lockwood v. Colvin, 2016 WL 6902341, *1 (D. Conn. 2016)(followed)
  • Eames v. Bowen, 864 F.2d 251, 252 (2d Cir. 1988)(followed)
  • Isaacs v. Astrue, 2009 WL 1748706, *3 (W.D.N.Y. 2009)(followed)
  • Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586, 594 (2010)(followed)
  • Kerr for Kerr v. Commissioner of Social Security, 874 F.3d 926, 937 (6th Cir. 2017)(followed)

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…