Legal Opinion
McCarty v. Astrue
District Court, N.D. California
Decided August 30, 2007No. C-04-05060 MHPPublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Re: Motion for Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(a) Order and Motion to Set Aside Wrongful Offset of EAJA Attorneys’ Fee.
MARILYN HALL PATEL, District Judge.
In the underlying action, plaintiff Steven McCarty (“plaintiff’) challenged the Social Security Administration’s denial of benefits. This court held in favor of plaintiff and remanded the case for a new determination date regarding the onset of plaintiffs disability. The court subsequently awarded plaintiff attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. 2412(d). Plaintiffs counsel, Ian M. Sammis…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- White v. New Hampshire Department of Employment SecuritySupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- United States v. James Daniel Good Real PropertySupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Crooks v. HarrelsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1930
- Evans v. Jeff D. Ex Rel. JohnsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- McGraw v. BarnhartCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2006
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Manning v. AstrueCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2007
- Chonko v. Commissioner of Social Security AdministrationDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2008
- Quade Ex Rel. Quade v. BarnhartDistrict Court, D. Arizona · 2008
- Stephens v. AstrueDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 2008
- Williams v. Commissioner of Social SecurityDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2008
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.