Charles C. v. Kijakazi
- Jerry Blackwell
- 0:22-cv-02054
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
In Charles C. v. Kijakazi, Judge Blackwell granted the attorney-fee motion and awarded $23,802 net from past-due benefits after an $8,000 offset.
Charles C. and his counsel, whose attorney-fee motion was granted; the $23,802 net fee is to be paid from Charles C.’s past-due benefits.
What happened
In Charles C. v. Kijakazi, Magistrate Judge Dulce J. Foster issued a report and recommendation on May 31, 2024. No one filed objections within the permitted time.
The report and recommendation addressed Charles C.’s motion for attorney fees under federal law. It recommended awarding counsel $31,802, reduced by an earlier $8,000 award under the Equal Access to Justice Act, for a net fee of $23,802.
Judge Jerry W. Blackwell reviewed the recommendation for clear error, found none, accepted it, and granted the fee motion. The net $23,802 is to be paid from Charles C.’s past-due benefits.
The detailed version
- Charles C. v. Kijakazi · No. 0:22-cv-02054
- Jerry W. Blackwell
- July 9, 2024
Background
United States Magistrate Judge Dulce J. Foster issued a Report and Recommendation on May 31, 2024. The opinion states that no objections were filed within the permitted time. When no timely objections are filed, the court reviews the recommendation for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake.
Attorney-fee request
Charles C. filed a motion seeking authorization for attorney fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b). The order does not discuss the underlying Social Security dispute; it addresses only the requested attorney-fee award.
Ruling
Judge Jerry W. Blackwell found no clear error in the Report and Recommendation and accepted it. The court granted Charles C.’s motion for authorization of attorney fees. It awarded counsel $31,802, reduced by the court’s original $8,000 Equal Access to Justice Act fee award, resulting in a net total fee of $23,802. The net fee is to be paid from Charles C.’s past-due benefits under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b).
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.