Legal Opinion
Turner v. Astrue
District Court, E.D. Kentucky
Decided September 14, 2010No. Civil Action 08-391PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
AMUL R. THAPAR, District Judge.
This case boils down to one issue: Has the plaintiff, John Turner, “incurred” attorney’s fees within the meaning of the Equal Access to Justice Act even though he is not yet contractually obligated to pay his attorney? He has not. Therefore, Turner’s motion for attorney’s fees, R. 21, is denied.
BACKGROUND
On October 9, 2009, 2009 WL 3270216, the Court reversed a finding by the Commissioner of Social Security that the plaintiff, John Turner, was not disabled. R. 19. The Court remanded the matter under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g)…
2Cases cited40 opinions
- Jones v. BockSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Astrue v. RatliffSupreme Court of the United States · 2010
- Gisbrecht v. BarnhartSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
- Shalala v. SchaeferSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Immigration & Naturalization Service v. ChadhaSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Turner v. Commissioner of Social SEC.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2012
- Taylor v. SSADistrict Court, E.D. Kentucky · 2020