Legal Opinion
Whiteman v. Bowen
District Court, S.D. Ohio
Decided July 28, 1986No. C-1-85-361PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER ON ATTORNEY’S FEES
SPIEGEL, District Judge:
This matter came on for consideration on the combined motion of plaintiff’s counsel for award of an attorney’s fee pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 406(b) and of plaintiff for her attorney’s fees pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) (doc. 10), to which the Secretary has responded in opposition (doc. 11). As developed briefly below, both motions for fees are denied.
I. Section 406(b)
The Secretary aptly characterizes this case as “an appeal under the authority of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) from a decision refusing to…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Powell v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
- In Re GriffithsSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Ex Parte WallSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- Theard v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Cohen v. HurleySupreme Court of the United States · 1961
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Jack E. COUP, Appellant, v. Margaret HECKLER, Secretary of Health and Human ServicesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1987
- Whiting v. BowenDistrict Court, W.D. Wisconsin · 1987
- Jack E. COUP, Appellant, v. Margaret HECKLER, Secretary of Health and Human ServicesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1987