Summary
The United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania considers Debra Grimsley’s motion for attorney’s fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b) following a remand and favorable Social Security disability determination. The court finds that the requested $15,422 fee would constitute a windfall and reduces the award to $12,165, based on 13.85 hours of work at a de facto rate of $900 per hour. The court also directs that Grimsley receive repayment of the previously awarded $3,450 EAJA fee.
Holdings
- A fee award under § 406(b) may not exceed 25 percent of past-due benefits and is not automatically warranted at that maximum; the attorney must establish that the requested fee is reasonable for the services rendered.
- A lodestar calculation may inform the court's assessment of reasonableness, but reducing a § 406(b) fee solely by beginning with or mechanically applying a lodestar analysis is not appropriate.
- The requested $15,422 fee would constitute an inappropriate windfall, but a fee of $12,165, calculated at $900 per hour for 13.85 hours, was reasonable in light of the representation, results, risk, fee agreement, and customary rates.
- When an attorney receives fees under both the EAJA and § 406(b), the attorney must refund to the claimant the amount of the smaller fee.
Questions Presented
- Whether the requested contingent-fee award under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b) was reasonable.
- Whether the requested award would constitute an improper windfall when measured against the time expended, counsel's customary rate, the results achieved, and the risks undertaken.
- Whether Grimsley was entitled to repayment of the previously awarded EAJA fee after approval of the § 406(b) fee.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (9)
- 535 U.S. 789 (2002)(followed)
- 586 F.3d 1142 (9th Cir. 2009) (en banc)(followed)
- 764 F. Supp. 2d 697, 699 (M.D. Pa. 2011)(followed)
- 923 F.2d 418, 422 (6th Cir. 1990)(considered)
- 2018 WL 4616735, at *4 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 24, 2018)(considered)
- 2025 WL 4661049, at *3 (M.D. Pa. June 5, 2025)(considered)
- 586 F.2d 1142, 1145-46 (9th Cir. 2009)(considered)
- 2007 WL 1498115, at *2 (M.D. Fla. May 14, 2007)(considered)
- 269 F. Supp. 2d 829, 832 (S.D. W. Va. 2003)(considered)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…