Summary
Pro se incarcerated litigant cannot recover attorney's fees under § 206(b) of the Social Security Act because that provision requires representation by an attorney and payment from past-due benefits. The Equal Access to Justice Act also precludes fees for pro se litigants, at least when incarcerated, as they cannot demonstrate forgone income from "lawyering." The Second Circuit affirmed denial of fees, following its precedent under the Freedom of Information Act.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether a pro se litigant is entitled to attorney's fees under section 206(b) of the Social Security Act.
- Whether a pro se litigant is entitled to attorney's fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act.
- Whether a pro se litigant is entitled to attorney's fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988.
Holdings
- No, because the statute requires representation by an attorney and the fee is paid from past-due benefits, which cannot benefit a pro se litigant.
- No, because the EAJA provides for 'reasonable attorney fees' and pro se litigants, especially incarcerated ones, cannot demonstrate that their 'lawyering' caused them to forgo regular income, as per the Second Circuit's decision in Crooker.
Key quotations
“The fee request was properly denied. Section 206(b) of the Social Security Act is plainly unavailable.” (895)
“Under the rationale of our Crooker decision, Sommer, an incarcerated prisoner, is not entitled to any attorney’s fee for his pro se “lawyering.”” (896)
Factual background
Sommer, an incarcerated pro se litigant, sued the Social Security Administration and achieved some success. He then sought attorney's fees under various statutes. The district court denied the motion.
Procedural history
Sommer, an incarcerated pro se litigant, achieved some success in litigation against the Social Security Administration and sought fees under section 206(b) of the Social Security Act, the EAJA, and arguably 42 U.S.C. § 1988. The district court denied the motion. Sommer appealed.