Featured Chrome Extensions:

Casey IRACs are produced by an AI that analyzes the opinion’s content to construct its analysis. While we strive for accuracy, the output may not be flawless. For a complete and precise understanding, please refer to the linked opinions above.

Keywords

attorneyappealmotion
plaintiffattorneymotion

Related Cases

In re Federated Department Stores, Inc., 43 Fed.Appx. 820, 2002 WL 1809094
View Case »
Sheppard v. United States Tennis Association Incorporated, 199 A.D.3d 846, 154 N.Y.S.3d 251 (Mem), 2021 N.Y. Slip Op. 06204
View Case »
IES Industries, Inc. v. U.S., Not Reported in F.Supp.2d, 1999 WL 973538, 84 A.F.T.R.2d 99-6445, 2001-2 USTC P 50,470
View Case »
Joseph Radtke, S.C. v. U.S., 712 F.Supp. 143, 63 A.F.T.R.2d 89-1469, 89-2 USTC P 9466, Unempl.Ins.Rep. (CCH) P 14644A
View Case »
Schnitzer v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 340 U.S. 911, 71 S.Ct. 291 (Mem), 95 L.Ed. 658
View Case »
Justia Law Link
LexisNexis Link
Westlaw Link
CourtListener Link
Oyez Link

Holsey v. Commissioner of Social Security, Not Reported in Fed. Supp., 2015 WL 8479301

Facts

Ronda Holsey applied for supplemental security income on behalf of her minor child, but the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration denied the application. Holsey appealed the decision, and the court reversed the denial, ordering a sentence-four remand for further proceedings. Following this, Holsey filed a request for attorney's fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act, which the Commissioner did not oppose.

Holsey prevailed because the Court ordered a sentence-four remand.

Issue

Whether Ronda Holsey is eligible for an award of attorney's fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act and whether the requested fees are reasonable.

A party is eligible if (1) she prevailed in a case against the United States, (2) she timely requested them, (3) her net worth did not exceed $2 million when she filed the case, (4) the United States' position was not substantially justified, and (5) no special circumstance would make the award unjust.

Rule

A party is eligible for an EAJA award if she prevailed against the United States, timely requested the fees, her net worth did not exceed $2 million, the United States' position was not substantially justified, and no special circumstances would make the award unjust.

A social-security plaintiff prevails if the court orders a sentence-four remand.

Analysis

The court determined that Holsey met the eligibility criteria for an EAJA award, as she had prevailed in her case, her request was timely, her net worth was below the threshold, and the Commissioner did not demonstrate that its position was substantially justified. The court also found that the requested attorney's fees were reasonable based on the prevailing market rates and the complexity of the case.

The first four conditions are satisfied here, and, as to the fifth one, no equitable consideration is apparent or presented that would make an EAJA award unjust.

Conclusion

The court granted Holsey's motion for attorney's fees and awarded her $3,787.66.

Thus, she is eligible to receive an EAJA award, and the only remaining issue is whether the requested amounts are reasonable.

Who won?

Ronda Holsey prevailed in the case because the court ordered a sentence-four remand and found her eligible for an EAJA award.

Because Holsey is eligible and her requested attorney's fees are reasonable, as modified, the Court grants her motion, Doc. 22, and awards her the adjusted attorney's fees.

You must be