Hudman v. Astrue

Full title: JUDY L. HUDMAN, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner, Social…

Court: United States District Court, D. New Mexico

Date published: May 18, 2009

Civ. No. 08-643 (D.N.M. May. 18, 2009)

Opinion

Civ. No. 08-643.

May 18, 2009

MEMORANDUM OPINION and ORDER AWARDING FEES PURSUANT TO THE EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT

RICHARD PUGLISI, Magistrate Judge

THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Plaintiff's Motion for an award of attorney fees and costs pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d) in the amount of Six Thousand Nine Hundred Ninety-three and 52/100 Dollars ($6,993.52) [Docket No. 22]. In his Response, Defendant states that he has no objection to the amount of fees as requested, but requests that the award be payable to Plaintiff as prevailing party. [Docket No. 25].

The plain language 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(1)(A) states, the "court shall award to a prevailing party . . . fees and other expenses." The Tenth Circuit has previously found that "an EAJA award is to the claimant." McGraw v. Barnhart, 450 F.3d 493, 497-498 (10th Cir. 2006).

The court FINDS:

(1) That Plaintiff's Request for Fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act is reasonable, and

(2) The proper payee for fees awarded under the Equal Access to Justice Act is Plaintiff.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion for attorneys' fees pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), in the amount of Six Thousand Nine Hundred Ninety-three and 52/100 Dollars ($6,993.52), is granted IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Commissioner shall make such fees payable to Plaintiff, but shall remit said fees to Plaintiff by sending payment in care of the offices of her attorney, Michael D. Armstrong.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that in the event of a subsequent award of fees pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 406(b), the refund provision ofWeakley v. Bowen, 803 F.2d 575, 580 (10^th Cir. 1986) will apply.