Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
D. Minn.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 23, 2024

Bridie W. v. O'Malley

Judge
Dulce Foster
Docket
0:24-cv-01582
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
2
Social SecurityFee PetitionCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Bridie W. v. O’Malley, Judge Foster approved $7,500 in Equal Access to Justice Act fees and costs and denied Bridie W.’s motion as moot.

Who this affects

Bridie W., her attorney Stephanie Christel, and the Commissioner of Social Security are affected by the fee award, payment conditions, and possible debt offset.

What happened

Bridie W. v. O’Malley concerned Bridie W.’s request for attorney fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act. She filed the request without the required statement showing that she had met and conferred with the Commissioner of Social Security.

The court later ordered Bridie W. to meet and confer and report whether the Commissioner objected. The parties then filed a joint agreement for $7,500 in fees and costs, and the court found that the agreement satisfied the meet-and-confer requirement.

Judge Dulce J. Foster denied Bridie W.’s fee motion as moot and approved the parties’ agreement. The Government must pay $7,500, subject to possible offset for certain debts and the payment arrangements described in the order.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Bridie W. v. O'Malley · No. 0:24-cv-01582
Judge
Dulce J. Foster
Date
Oct. 23, 2024

Background

The court considered Bridie W.’s motion for attorney fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(1)(A), and the parties’ joint stipulation for EAJA fees. Bridie W. filed the motion on October 16, 2024, without filing the meet-and-confer statement required by the court’s local rule.

On October 22, 2024, the court ordered Bridie W. to meet and confer with the Commissioner of Social Security and file a statement about whether the Commissioner objected to the motion. Later that day, the parties filed their joint stipulation. The court inferred that the parties had met and conferred and found that the stipulation satisfied Bridie W.’s filing obligation.

Ruling

The court denied Bridie W.’s attorney-fee motion as moot. Based on the parties’ agreement, it approved the stipulation and ordered the Government to pay Bridie W. $7,500 in attorney fees and costs.

The order states that the fees may be offset to satisfy a qualifying preexisting debt owed by Bridie W. to the United States. If there is no qualifying debt and the Commissioner waives the Anti-Assignment Act’s requirements, the fees will be payable to Bridie W.’s attorney, Stephanie Christel. If a qualifying debt exists, the remaining fees after the offset will be paid by check made out to Bridie W. Any payment check must be delivered to Bridie W.’s attorney at Livgard, Lloyd & Christel PLLP.

Classification

This is a procedural order because it awards attorney fees, an issue ancillary to the underlying case, and resolves the fee motion without deciding the merits of the Social Security dispute.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.