Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
D. Minn.Procedural orderFiled Sept. 30, 2022

Mai V. v. Kijakazi

Judge
Eric Tostrud
Docket
0:17-cv-04347
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
1
Fee PetitionSocial Security
In one sentence

In Mai V. v. Kijakazi, Judge Tostrud granted $29,378.63 in attorney fees and ordered counsel to refund $7,680 in earlier fees.

Who this affects

Mai V. and her counsel are affected: the court awarded $29,378.63 in attorney fees and required counsel to refund $7,680 to Mai V.

What happened

Mai V. asked the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota to award attorney fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b) in her Social Security case.

Magistrate Judge David T. Schultz recommended granting the fee request. No party objected, so the district court reviewed the recommendation for clear error and found none.

Judge Eric C. Tostrud accepted the recommendation, granted the motion, awarded $29,378.63 in attorney fees, and ordered Mai V.’s counsel to refund her $7,680 in previously awarded fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act.

The detailed version

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

Case
Mai V. v. Kijakazi · No. 0:17-cv-04347
Judge
Eric Tostrud
Date
Sept. 30, 2022

Background

Magistrate Judge David T. Schultz issued a Report and Recommendation on September 12, 2022. The recommendation addressed Mai V.’s motion for attorney fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b). No party objected to the recommendation.

Court’s review and ruling

Because there were no objections, the district court reviewed the Report and Recommendation for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake. The court found no clear error and accepted the recommendation.

The court granted Mai V.’s motion for attorney fees under § 406(b), awarded $29,378.63 in attorney fees, and ordered her counsel to refund $7,680 to Mai V. That refund represented Equal Access to Justice Act fees previously awarded.

Disposition

The court ordered judgment to be entered accordingly. The opinion addresses an attorney-fee award and related refund rather than the underlying Social Security dispute.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-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.