Summary
The United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio granted Plaintiff’s counsel $10,481.00 in attorney’s fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b)(1), representing 25% of the claimant’s past-due Social Security benefits. The court found the requested contingency fee reasonable and ordered counsel to refund the prior $4,400.00 EAJA award to the plaintiff.
Holdings
- A contingency fee equal to 25 percent of past-due benefits is not automatically awarded; the court must independently review the requested fee and determine whether it is reasonable for the services rendered.
- The requested fee of $10,481, representing 25 percent of Plaintiff's past-due benefits, was reasonable and was awarded to Plaintiff's counsel.
- After receiving the § 406(b)(1) fee, Plaintiff's counsel must remit the prior EAJA award of $4,400 to Plaintiff within 14 days of receipt of the § 406(b)(1) award.
Questions Presented
- Whether Plaintiff's counsel was entitled to an attorney's fee award under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b)(1) after a sentence-four remand resulted in an award of past-due benefits.
- Whether the requested fee of $10,481, equal to 25 percent of Plaintiff's past-due benefits, was reasonable under the contingency-fee agreement and applicable Sixth Circuit standards.
- Whether counsel was required to refund the prior EAJA fee award to Plaintiff after receiving the § 406(b)(1) fee.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (11)
- Horenstein v. Secretary of HHS, 35 F.3d 261, 262 (6th Cir. 1994) (en banc)(followed)
- Gisbrecht v. Barnhart, 535 U.S. 789, 800, 807-08 (2002)(followed)
- Rodriquez v. Brown, 865 F.2d 739, 746-47 (6th Cir. 1989)(followed)
- Hayes v. Secretary of HHS, 923 F.2d 418, 422 (6th Cir. 1990)(followed)
- Joseph J. Royzer v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, Royzer v. Secretary of HHS, 900 F.2d 981, 981-82 (6th Cir. 1990)(followed)
- Tucker v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 136 F.4th 639, 644-45, 648 (6th Cir. 2025)(followed)
- Jankovich v. Bowen, 868 F.2d 867, 871 n.1 (6th Cir. 1989)(followed)
- Twyla D. v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., No. 3:19-cv-368, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 40825, at *4 (S.D. Ohio Mar. 6, 2025)(followed by analogy)
- Jay V.N.I. v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., No. 3:20-cv-365, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 98031, at *4 (S.D. Ohio June 3, 2024)(followed by analogy)
- Martha G. v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., No. 1:19-cv-936, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 63838, at *6-7 (S.D. Ohio Apr. 11, 2023), report and recommendation adopted by 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 77738 (S.D. Ohio May 3, 2023)(followed by analogy)
Showing top 10 of 11.
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…