Priestley v. Astrue; Peter v. Astrue; Davis v. Comm'n of Soc. Sec. Admin., No. 10-1160 (4th Cir. 2011)
Annotate this CasePlaintiffs in these three cases prevailed in district court on their appeals from the Social Security Administration's denial of their claims for disability benefits, and then, as prevailing parties, filed motions under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. 2412(d), for "fees and other expenses." On appeal, plaintiffs contended that their attorney's retention of out-of-state attorneys for assistance in brief writing did not preclude reimbursement for their fees under the EAJA, nor did it violate the District of South Carolina's local rules, and therefore, they argued, there were no "special circumstances" to justify the out-of-state attorneys fees. The court held that even though the District of South Carolina appropriately regulated the practice of law in its court, the court concluded that the use of non-admitted lawyers for brief writing services did not present a "special circumstance" sufficient to deny a fee award as "unjust" under the EAJA. Accordingly, the court vacated and remanded for reconsideration of the fee applications.
The court issued a subsequent related opinion or order on July 12, 2011.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.