Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-arwd-1_05-cv-01082/USCOURTS-arwd-1_05-cv-01082-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 863
Nature of Suit: Social Security - DIWC/DIWW (405(g))
Cause of Action: 42:405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)

---

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS

EL DORADO DIVISION

ALMA P. TURNER PLAINTIFF

vs. Civil No. 1:05-cv-01082

MICHAEL J. ASTRUE DEFENDANT

Commissioner, Social Security Administration 

ORDER

Pending now before this Court is Plaintiff’s Application for Attorney Fees Under the Equal

Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”). (Doc. No. 26).1 Defendant responded to this Motion and has no

objections to this Motion. (Doc. No. 29). The parties have consented to the jurisdiction of a

magistrate judge to conduct any and all proceedings in this case, including conducting the trial,

ordering the entry of a final judgment, and conducting all post-judgment proceedings. (Doc. No. 4). 

Pursuant to this authority, the Court issues this Order. 

1. Background:

Alma P. Turner (“Plaintiff”) appealed to this Court from the Secretary of the Social Security

Administration’s(“SSA”) denial of her request for DisabilityInsurance Benefits (“DIB”) under Title

II of the Act. (Doc. No. 1). On January 20, 2010, this Court reversed and remanded Plaintiff’s case

pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). (Doc. No. 25).

On April 19, 2010, Plaintiff filed the present Motion requesting an award of attorney’s fees

under the EAJA. (Doc. No. 26). With this Motion, Plaintiff requests an award of attorney’s fees of 

$1,450.00, representing 10.0 attorney hours at an hourly rate of $145.00 per attorney hour. See id. 

Defendant responded to this Motion on April 22, 2010 and has no objections. (Doc. No. 29). 

1

The docket numbers for this case are referenced by the designation “Doc. No.”

Case 1:05-cv-01082-BAB Document 30 Filed 04/27/10 Page 1 of 4 PageID #: <pageID>
2. Applicable Law: 

Pursuant to the EAJA, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(1)(A), a court must award attorney's fees to a

prevailing social security claimant unless the Secretary’s position in denying benefits was

substantially justified. The Secretary has the burden of proving that the denial of benefits was

substantially justified. See Jackson v. Bowen, 807 F.2d 127, 128 (8th Cir.1986) (“The Secretary

bearsthe burden of proving that its position in the administrative and judicial proceedings below was

substantially justified”). An EAJA application also must be made within thirty days of a final

judgment in an action, See 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(1)(B), or within thirty days after the sixty day time

for appeal has expired. See Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292, 298 (1993). 

An award of attorney’s fees under the EAJA is appropriate even though, at the conclusion

of the case, the plaintiff’s attorney may be authorized to charge and to collect a fee pursuant to 42

U.S.C. § 406(b)(1). Recovery of attorney’s fees under both the EAJA and 42 U.S.C. § 406(b)(1) was

specifically allowed when Congress amended the EAJA in 1985. See Gisbrecht v. Barnhart, 535

U.S. 789, 796 (2002) (citing Pub. L. No. 99-80, 99 Stat. 186 (1985)). The United States Supreme

Court stated that Congress harmonized an award of attorney’s fees under the EAJA and under 42

U.S.C. § 406(b)(1) as follows: 

Fee awards may be made under both prescriptions [EAJA and 42 U.S.C. §

406(b)(1)], but the claimant’s attorney must “refun[d] to the claimant the amount of

the smaller fee.”. . .“Thus, an EAJA award offsets an award under Section 406(b),

so that the [amount of total past-due benefits the claimant actually receives] will be

increased by the . . . EAJA award up to the point the claimant receives 100 percent

of the past-due benefits.” 

Id. Furthermore, awarding fees under both acts facilitates the purposes of the EAJA, which is to

shift to the United States the prevailing party’s litigation expenses incurred while contesting

unreasonable government action. See id.; Cornella v. Schweiker, 728 F.2d 978, 986 (8th Cir. 1984).

2

Case 1:05-cv-01082-BAB Document 30 Filed 04/27/10 Page 2 of 4 PageID #: <pageID>
The statutory ceiling for an EAJA fee award is $125.00 per hour. See 28 U.S.C. §

2412(d)(2)(A). A court is only authorized to exceed this statutory rate if “the court determines that

an increase in the cost of living or a special factor, such as the limited availability of qualified

attorneys for the proceedings involved, justifies a higher fee.” Id. A court may determine that there

has been an increase in the cost of living, and may thereby increase the attorney’s rate per hour,

based upon the United States Department of Labor’s Consumer Price Index (“CPI”). See Johnson

v. Sullivan, 919 F.2d 503, 504 (8th Cir. 1990). 

3. Discussion:

In the present action, Plaintiff’s case was remanded to the SSA. (Doc. No. 25). Defendant

does not contest Plaintiff’s claim that she is the prevailing party, does not oppose her application for

fees under the EAJA, does not object to the hourly rate she requested, and does not dispute the

number of hours expended by counsel. (Doc. No. 29). The Court construes this lack of opposition

to this application as an admission that the government’s decision to deny benefits was not

“substantially justified” and that Plaintiff is the prevailing party. 

Plaintiff requests a total award of $1,450.00 under the EAJA. (Doc. No. 26). Plaintiff

requeststhese fees at a rate of $145.00 per hour for 10.0 hours of attorney work. See id. This hourly

rate of $145.00 per attorney hour is authorized by the EAJA as long as a CPI is submitted. See 28

U.S.C. § 2412(d)(2)(A); Johnson, 919 F.2d at 504. In the present action, Plaintiff submitted a CPI. 

(Doc. No. 28). Therefore, this hourly rate is authorized by the EAJA, and this Court finds that

Plaintiffis entitled to an hourly rate of $145.00 per attorney hour. Further, I have reviewed counsel’s

itemization of time appended to Plaintiff’s application. (Doc. No. 27). This Court notes that

Defendant has not objected to the number of hours for which counsel seeks a fee award, and this

3

Case 1:05-cv-01082-BAB Document 30 Filed 04/27/10 Page 3 of 4 PageID #: <pageID>
Court finds the time asserted to be spent in the representation of Plaintiff before the district court is

reasonable. Thus, this Court finds that Plaintiff is entitled to an attorney’s fee award under EAJA

in the amount of $1,450.00, representing 10.0 attorney hours at an hourly rate of $145.00 per

attorney hour. 

4. Conclusion:

Based upon the foregoing, the Court awards $1,450.00 pursuant to the EAJA, 28 U.S.C.

§ 2412. 

ENTERED this 26th day of April, 2010. 

 

 /s/ Barry A. Bryant 

 HON. BARRY A. BRYANT 

 U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE

4

Case 1:05-cv-01082-BAB Document 30 Filed 04/27/10 Page 4 of 4 PageID #: <pageID>