Summary
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California grants Plaintiff Kimberly Sue Manor’s motion for attorney’s fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b) following a remand and award of past-due Social Security benefits. The court awards counsel $23,700, finding the fee reasonable under the contingent-fee agreement, the statutory cap, the results obtained, and the time expended. Counsel is directed to remit $6,300 in previously awarded EAJA fees to Plaintiff.
Holdings
- A fee request within the statutory 25-percent ceiling is not automatically recoverable; the court must review the contingent-fee agreement and determine whether the requested fee is reasonable for the services rendered. The requested $23,700 fee was reasonable.
- When counsel receives a § 406(b) fee award after previously receiving EAJA fees for the same representation, counsel must remit the EAJA amount to the claimant.
Questions Presented
- Whether the requested $23,700 attorney's fee under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b) was reasonable.
- Whether the § 406(b) award had to be offset by the $6,300 in previously awarded EAJA fees and remitted to Plaintiff.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (7)
- Crawford v. Astrue, 586 F.3d 1142, 1145-47, 1149, 1151-52 (9th Cir. 2009) (en banc)(followed)
- Gisbrecht v. Barnhart, 535 U.S. 789, 793, 796, 802, 807-09 (2002)(followed)
- Parrish v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 698 F.3d 1215, 1217 (9th Cir. 2012)(followed)
- Costa v. Commissioner, 690 F.3d 1132, 1136 (9th Cir. 2012)(followed)
- Guzman Paz v. Commissioner, 2024 WL 4029592 (E.D. Cal. Sept. 3, 2024)(persuasive)
- Garcia v. Commissioner, 2024 WL 3968083 (E.D. Cal. Aug. 28, 2024)(persuasive)
- Roxsann D. A. v. O’Malley, 2024 WL 1136398 (C.D. Cal. Feb. 12, 2024)(persuasive)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…