Legal Opinion
Bryan v. Astrue
District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania
Decided May 16, 2011No. Civil Action 3:07-CV-2121PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
A. RICHARD CAPUTO, District Judge.
Presently before the Court is plaintiff Bryan’s (“Bryan”) motion for attorneys’ fees (Doc. 24) pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”). Defendant Astrue argues that plaintiff is not entitled to attorneys’ fees because the government’s position was “substantially justified.” Because the court agrees with defendant’s position, the motion for attorneys’ fees will be denied.
BACKGROUND
Bryan applied for Social Security Disability Insurance (“SSDI”) benefits on October 2, 2004, alleging that he required disability benefits as of April 13,…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Pierce v. UnderwoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Ethel Burnett v. Commissioner of Social Security AdministrationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2000
- Helene Marcus v. Joseph A. Califano, Jr., Secretary of Health, Education and WelfareCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1979
- Morgan v. PerryCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1998
- Hany Mahmoud Kiareldeen v. John AshcroftCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2001
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Clark v. AstrueDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2011