From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Crooks v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
Jul 10, 2014
Case No. 12-13365 (E.D. Mich. Jul. 10, 2014)

Summary

approving hourly rate above statutory maximum

Summary of this case from Herbster v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.

Opinion

Case No. 12-13365

07-10-2014

ROBERT L. CROOKS, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.


Paul D. Borman

United States District Judge


Michael Hluchaniuk

United States Magistrate Judge


ORDER (1) ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND

RECOMMENDATION (DKT. NO. 33) AND (2) AWARDING PLAINTIFF $7,621.13

IN COSTS AND FEES PURSUANT TO THE EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT

Before the Court is Magistrate Judge Michael Hluchaniuk's June 4, 2014 Report and Recommendation regarding Plaintiff's Application for Attorneys' Fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412 ("EAJA"). (Report and Recommendation, Dkt. No. 33). As set forth in the Report and Recommendation, the Magistrate Judge recommends that this Court grant in part Plaintiff's Application for Attorneys' Fees, reducing the amount claimed to $7,621.13. (Id., at 20).

Having reviewed the Report and Recommendation, and there being no timely objections from either party under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and E.D. Mich L.R. 72.1(d), the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 33); and AWARDS Plaintiff attorney fees in the amount of $7,621.13 pursuant to the EAJA. IT IS SO ORDERED.

__________

PAUL D. BORMAN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing order was served upon each attorney or party of record herein by electronic means or first class U.S. mail on July 10, 2014.

Deborah Tofil

Case Manager


Summaries of

Crooks v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
Jul 10, 2014
Case No. 12-13365 (E.D. Mich. Jul. 10, 2014)

approving hourly rate above statutory maximum

Summary of this case from Herbster v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.

awarding EAJA fees because "the ALJ's failure to obtain the opinion of a qualified medical advisor on the issue of equivalence violated SSR 96-6p," and thus "ran contrary to established legal precedent"

Summary of this case from McPhee v. Soc. Sec. Comm'r
Case details for

Crooks v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.

Case Details

Full title:ROBERT L. CROOKS, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

Date published: Jul 10, 2014

Citations

Case No. 12-13365 (E.D. Mich. Jul. 10, 2014)

Citing Cases

Vock v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.

For example, Plaintiff cites Crooks v. Commissioner of Social Security to argue that "[i]ncreased hourly…

McPhee v. Soc. Sec. Comm'r

In such instances, the error is clearly not harmless. Accord, e.g., Crooks v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., No.…