Lunde v. Commissioner of Social Security
| John Lunde |
| Commissioner of Social Security |
| Social Security - Office of the General Counsel |
| 1:2023cv01264 |
| July 18, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Central District of Illinois |
| Jonathan E Hawley |
| James E Shadid |
| Social Security: SSID Tit. XVI |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 416 Denial of Social Security Benefits |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 15, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
TEXT ONLY ORDER: This matter is before the Court on #7 , the Plaintiff's unopposed consent motion for a fee petition in the amount of $924.85 for 3.9 attorney hours at the rate of $237.14 per hour for work performed in 2023 under the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C.A. 2412(d). The amount is not directly payable to the attorney of record, David B. Goetz, as the fees may be used to offset any pre-existing debt that the claimant may owe the United States. See United States. Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586 (2010). The parties do not assert, however, that the $924.85 represents 25% or less of the past-due benefits owed claimant. See Loar v. Saul, TLS-18-775, 2020 WL 3302990, at *1 (N.D. Ind. June 18, 2020) (Although the Court may award a reasonable fee to the attorney who has successfully represented the claimant in federal court, this amount cannot exceed twenty-five percent of the past-due benefits to which the social security claimant is entitled.) (quotation and citation omitted). #7 is RESERVED. The parties are requested to provide additional information as to whether $924.85 exceeds 25% of Plaintiffs past-due benefits, within 21 days. Entered by Judge James E. Shadid on 9/15/2023. (AH)
|
| Filing 7 Consent MOTION for Attorney Fees unopposed consent motion for attorney's fee under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) based upon a remand from the Commissioner of Social Security under 42 U.S.C. section 405(g). by Plaintiff John Lunde. Responses due by 9/28/2023 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Assignment of EAJA fee to Plaintiff's counsel.)(Goetz, David) |
| Filing 6 JUDGMENT entered. (AH) |
|
Filing 5
ORDER re #4 Stipulation filed by Commissioner of Social Security. It is hereby ordered that this matter shall be remanded back to the Commissioner for further administrative proceedings pursuant to sentence four of Section 205 of the Social Security Act, which is codified at 42 U.S.C. 405(g). (See full Order) Entered by Judge James E. Shadid on 9/7/2023. (AH)
|
| Filing 4 STIPULATION to Remand to the Commissioner by Commissioner of Social Security.. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order)(Yarnell, Eric) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE of Appearance of Attorney by Eric Charles Yarnell on behalf of Commissioner of Social Security (Yarnell, Eric) |
|
TEXT ORDER entered by Judge Jonathan E. Hawley on 7/19/2023 GRANTING #2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1915. The Plaintiff's Motion to Proceed in forma pauperis was submitted under penalty of perjury and sufficiently demonstrates that the Plaintiff should be excused from paying the filing fee in this action. (WG)
|
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Plaintiff John Lunde. Responses due by 8/1/2023 (Goetz, David) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Kilolo Kijakazi, filed by John Lunde. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Goetz, David) |
| NOTICE of Social Security Complaint filed. Commissioner of Social Security answer due on 9/18/2023. (TK) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Illinois Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
