Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
D. Minn.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 29, 2024

Rymer v. O'Malley

Judge
Jeffrey Bryan
Docket
0:23-cv-03315
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
1
Fee PetitionSocial Security
In one sentence

In Rymer v. O’Malley, Judge Bryan granted Stacy Rymer’s fee motion and awarded $760.50 under the Equal Access to Justice Act.

Who this affects

Stacy Rymer received a $760.50 attorneys’ fee award; the Government may offset the award for any qualifying preexisting debt Rymer owes it.

What happened

In Rymer v. O’Malley, Stacy Rymer asked for attorneys’ fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act. The Government did not object to the requested award.

The court found that Rymer was entitled to the fees and that the amount requested was reasonable. It ordered an award of $760.50.

Judge Jeffrey M. Bryan granted Rymer’s motion. The award must be paid directly to Rymer and may be reduced to cover any qualifying preexisting debt she owes the Government.

The detailed version

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

Case
Rymer v. O'Malley · No. 0:23-cv-03315
Judge
Jeffrey M. Bryan
Date
Apr. 29, 2024

Background

Stacy Rymer moved for attorneys’ fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d). The Government stated that it had no objection to the requested award. It noted that any award must be paid directly to Rymer rather than her attorneys and could be subject to an offset for any preexisting debt she might owe the Government.

Court’s ruling

The court found that Rymer had established her entitlement to the requested fees and that the amount was reasonable. It granted her motion and awarded $760.50 in attorneys’ fees under the EAJA.

Payment of the award

The award is payable directly to Rymer. The opinion states that it may be offset to satisfy any preexisting debt she might owe to the Government.

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.