Helen GATSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Otis R. BOWEN, M.D., Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, Defendant-Appellee (1988)

Indeed, we would not be surprised if — should Caring Hearts bring an otherwise eligible application for costs and fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412 (d) — CMS were to accept on remand that its positions in this case were not “substantially justified.” See Gatson v. Bowen, 854 F.2d 379, 380-81 (10th Cir. 1988); Estate of Smith v. O’Halloran, 930 F.2d 1496, 1501-02 (10th Cir. 1991).

Even though in Mr. Pritchett’s pri- or appeal we implicitly disagreed with the analysis in the Sandoval panel’s decision (a disagreement we need not resolve here), we cannot say that the Commissioner’s adoption of the same argument relied upon in Sandoval was substantially unjustified. 1 The Commissioner’s position was thus unlike that of the Secretary in Gatson v. Bowen, 854 F.2d 379, 380-81 (10th Cir. 1988), who continued to advance an argument that was no longer viable be…

A. We begin our evaluation of the government’s defense position by considering whether the government had a “ ‘reasonable basis ... for the facts alleged.’ ” Gatson v. Bowen, 854 F.2d 379, 380-81 (10th Cir.1988) (quoting United States v. 2,116 Boxes of Boned Beef, 726 F.2d 1481 , 1487 (10th Cir.1984)).

To do so, the government must prove that its case had a reasonable basis in law and in fact.” Hadden v. Bowen, 851 F.2d 1266, 1267 (10th Cir.1988) (citations omitted). “[T]he reasonableness test breaks down into three parts: the government must show that there is a reasonable basis for the facts alleged[;] that there exists a reasonable basis in law for the theory it propounds; and that the facts alleged will reasonably support the legal theory advanced.” Gatson v. Bowen, 85…

See Shalala v. Schaefer, 113 S.Ct. 2625, 2631-32 (1993)(Claimant who obtains a remand order is a prevailing party for purposes of EAJA); Goatcher v. Chater, 57 F.3d 980, 981 (10th Cir.1995)("In a suit challenging the denial of social security disability benefits, it is a judgment reversing and remanding a case to the Secretary for additional proceedings under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405 (g) that makes a plaintiff a prevailing party for purposes of the EAJA."); Flores v.…

Gatson v. Bowen, 854 F.2d 379, 380 (10th Cir.1988).

"In this circuit the test for substantial justification is essentially one of 'reasonableness in both law and fact.' " Fulton v. Heckler, 784 F.2d 348, 349 (10th Cir.1986) (quoting United States v. Community Bank & Trust Co., 768 F.2d 311, 314 (10th Cir.1985)). 33 "[T]he reasonableness test breaks down into three parts: the government must show 'that there is a reasonable basis ... for the facts alleged ... [;] that there exists a reasonable basis in law for the theory it pr…

“In this circuit the test for substantial justification is essentially one of ‘reasonableness in both law and fact.’ ” Fulton v. Heckler, 784 F.2d 348, 349 (10th Cir.1986) (quoting United States v. Community Bank & Trust Co., 768 F.2d 311, 314 (10th Cir.1985)). “[T]he reasonableness test breaks down into three parts: the government must show ‘that there is a reasonable basis ... for the facts alleged ... [;] that there exists a reasonable basis in law for the theory it propo…

Gatson v. Bowen, 854 F.2d 379, 380-81 (10th Cir.1988); Weakley v. Bowen, 803 F.2d 575, 579 (10th Cir.1986). 42 Applying these standards to the instant case, we must hold that the district court erred in finding that the position of the Secretary was substantially justified under Sec. 2412(d)(1)(A) from the commencement of this litigation until March 24, 1987, in light of this court's prior holding that the Secretary had abdicated her duty under the Medicaid Act when she fail…

Gatson v. Bowen, 854 F.2d 379, 380-81 (10th Cir.1988); Weakley v. Bowen, 803 F.2d 575, 579 (10th Cir.1986).

Oregon Natural Resources Council v. Lyng, 882 F.2d 1417, 1428 (9th Cir.1989); Animal Lovers Volunteer Association v. Carlucci, 867 F.2d 1224, 1226 (9th Cir.1989); Russell v. Heckler, 866 F.2d 638, 640 (3d Cir.1989); Ramon-Sepulveda v. INS, 863 F.2d 1458, 1460-61 (9th Cir.1988); Gatson v. Bowen, 854 F.2d 379, 380-81 (10th Cir.1988); Wilkett v. ICC, 844 F.2d 867, 872 (D.C.Cir.1988); Hudson v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 839 F.2d 1453, 1456-57 (11th *1220 Cir.1988),…

Gatson v. Bowen, 854 F.2d 379, 380-81 (10th Cir. 1988).

The government must show: (1) “that there is a reasonable basis ... for the facts alleged”; (2) “that there exists a reasonable basis in law for the theory it propounds”; and (3) “that the facts will reasonably support the legal theory advanced.” Gatson v. Bowen, 854 F.2d 379, 380 (10th Cir.1988) (quoting United States v. *1469 2,116 Boxes of Boned Beef, 726 F.2d 1481 , 1487 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 825 , 105 S.Ct. 105 , 83 L.Ed.2d 49 (1984)).

Id. (quoting Gatson v. Bowen, 854 F.2d 379, 380 (10th Cir.1988) (quotations omitted)).

When determining whether the government’s litigating position was substantially justified, for example, the district court considers whether the government’s “litigating position was reasonable even if wrong.” Madron v. Astrue, 646 F.3d 1255, 1257 (10th Cir. 2011) (citing Gaston v. Bowen, 854 F.2d 379, 380 (10th Cir. 1988)) (emphasis in original).

Gatson v. Bowen, 854 F.2d 379, 381 (10th Cir. 1988).

Gatson v. Bowen, 854 F.2d 379, 380 (10th Cir. 1988) (citing United States v. 2,116 Boxes of Boned Beef, 726 F.2d 1481 , 1487 (10th Cir. 1984)).

See Chester v. Apfel, 1 F. App’x 792, 793-95 (10th Cir. 2001) (stating the Commissioner’s “position must have a reasonable basis both in law and fact” and reversing because “the record reveals no reasonable basis for either the ALJ’s obvious legal error in failing to develop the vocational record in the first instance, or for the Commissioner’s litigation position” (emphasis added and internal quotation marks omitted)); Gatson v. Bowen, 854 F.2d 379, 380 (10th Cir. 1988) (th…

She argues, “when the agency’s legal theories are inconsistent with the correct governing legal standard, the Commissioner cannot show that h[er] position was substantially justified.” (EAJA Reply 6) (citing Gatson v. Bowen, 854 F.2d 379, 380-81 (10th Cir. 1988); Washington v. Heckler, 756 F.2d 959, 962 (3d Cir. 1985); and Quintero v. Colvin, 642 F. App’x 793, 796 (10th Cir. 2016)).

Gatson v. Bowen, 854 F.2d 379, 380 (10th Cir.1988).

Harris v. Railroad Retirement Bd., 990 F.2d 519, 520-21 (10th Cir.1993) (citing Gatson v. Bowen, 854 F.2d 379, 380 (10th Cir.1988)); accord Gilbert, 45 F.3d at 1394 ; Gutierrez v. Sullivan, 953 F.2d 579, 585 (10th Cir.1992). 19 .See, e.g., Sales, 228 B.R. at 753 -54 (citing First Card v. Leonard (In re Leonard), 158 B.R. 839 (Bankr.D.Colo.1993) (§ 523(d) fees and costs were awarded to the debtor in part because the creditor did not conduct any discovery prior to filing its c…

Gutierrez v. Sullivan, 958 F.2d 579 , 585 (10th Cir.1992) (citing Gatson v. Bowen, 854 F.2d 379, 380 (10th Cir.1988)).

“In this circuit the test for substantial justification is essentially one of ‘reasonableness in both law and fact.’ ” Fulton v. Heckler, 784 F.2d 348, 349 (10th Cir.1986) (quoting United States v. Community Bank & Trust Co., 768 F.2d 311, 314 (10th Cir.1985)). “[T]he reasonableness test breaks down into three parts: the government must show ‘that there is a reasonable basis ... for the facts alleged ...[;] that there exists a reasonable basis in law for the theory it propou…

Headlee v. Bowen, 869 F.2d 548, 551 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 979 , 110 S.Ct. 507 , 107 L.Ed.2d 509 (1989); Gatson v. Bowen, 854 F.2d 379, 381 (10th Cir.1988).

See Gatson v. Bowen, 854 F.2d 379, 380 (10th Cir. 1988).

See Gatson v. Bowen, 854 F.2d 379, 380 (10th Cir.1988).

See Gatson v. Bowen, 854 F.2d 379, 380 (10th Cir.1988).

See Gatson v. Bowen, 854 F.2d 379, 380 (10th Cir.1988). 9 We agree that the district court's remand order is less than clear as to which sentence controlled.

Thus, we hold that plaintiffs' request before this court is timely, and we will examine the merits of their attorney's fees claim. 21 To repeat, plaintiffs are not entitled to attorney's fees if the government's position is "substantially justified." In this context, "substantially" means " 'justified in substance or in the main'--that is, justified to a degree that could satisfy a reasonable person." Pierce v. Underwood, 487 U.S. 552, 565 , 108 S.Ct. 2541, 2550 , 101 L.Ed.2…

To repeat, plaintiffs are not entitled to attorney’s fees if the government’s position is “substantially justified.” In this context, “substantially” means “ ‘justified in substance or in the main’ — that is, justified to a degree that could satisfy a reasonable person.” Pierce v. Underwood, 487 U.S. 552, 565 , 108 S.Ct. 2541, 2550 , 101 L.Ed.2d 490 (1988); see also Gatson v. Bowen, 854 F.2d 379, 380 (10th Cir.1988).

See Gatson v. Bowen, 854 F.2d 379, 381 (10th Cir.1988) (maximum number of hours and hourly rate for EAJA attorney fees question of fact to be determined by the district court); Hadden v. Bowen, 851 F.2d 1266, 1268 (10th Cir.1988) (review district court's application of EAJA for an abuse of discretion); Vibra-Tech Engineers, Inc. v. United States, 787 F.2d 1416, 1418 (10th Cir.1986) (district court's ruling on EAJA attorney fees to be modified only when there is an abuse of d…

See Gatson v. Bowen, 854 F.2d 379, 381 (10th Cir.1988) (maximum number of hours and hourly rate for EAJA attorney fees question of fact to be determined by the district court); Hadden v. Bowen, 851 F.2d 1266, 1268 (10th Cir.1988) (review district court’s application of EAJA for an abuse of discretion); Vibra-Tech Engineers, Inc. v. United States, 787 F.2d 1416, 1418 (10th Cir.1986) (district court’s ruling on EAJA attorney fees to be modified only when there is an abuse of d…

“The government’s success or failure on the merits at each level may be evidence of whether its position was substantially justified, but that success or failure alone is not determinative of the issue.” Hadden, 851 F.2d at 1267 ; see also Gatson v. Bowen, 854 F.2d 379, 381 (10th Cir. 1988) (discrediting the argument that a position is substantially justified solely because it has been upheld by a district court) (citing Weakley v. Bowen, 803 F.2d 575, 579 (10th Cir. 1986)).…

Harris, 990 F.2d at 520-21 ; see Gatson v. Bowen, 854 F.2d 379, 380 (10th Cir.1988) (applying United States v. 2,116 Boxes of Boned Beef, 726 F.2d 1481 , 1486-87 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 825 , 105 S.Ct. 105 , 83 L.Ed.2d 49 (1984)).