Marden v. Commissioner of Social Security
- Gabriel Gorenstein
- 1:22-cv-10735
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Marden v. Commissioner, Judge Gorenstein granted counsel’s fee application, awarding $8,472 from past-due benefits and requiring reimbursement of earlier Equal Access to Justice Act fees.
Joseph Marden and his attorney, Howard D. Olinsky. The $8,472 award is to be paid from Marden’s past-due benefits, and counsel must reimburse Marden for previously received Equal Access to Justice Act fees.
What happened
In Marden v. Commissioner of Social Security, Joseph Marden’s attorney asked the court for fees under the Social Security Act and 42 U.S.C. § 406(b)(1).
The court granted the application and awarded attorney Howard Olinsky $8,472. The fee must be paid from Marden’s past-due benefits, and Olinsky must reimburse Marden for fees previously received under the Equal Access to Justice Act.
Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein ruled that the application satisfied the factors identified by the Supreme Court in Gisbrecht v. Barnhart and gave reasons similar to those in an earlier Southern District of New York decision.
The detailed version
- Marden v. Commissioner of Social Security · No. 1:22-cv-10735
- Gabriel Gorenstein
- June 25, 2024
Background
Joseph Marden, through attorney Howard D. Olinsky, moved for attorney’s fees under Social Security Act § 206(b)(1) and 42 U.S.C. § 406(b)(1). The motion was supported by a fee petition and exhibits filed on June 12, 2024.
Court’s Ruling
The court stated: “Application granted.” It considered the factors identified in Gisbrecht v. Barnhart, 535 U.S. 789 (2002), and granted the application for reasons similar to those stated in Blizzard v. Astrue, 496 F. Supp. 2d 320 (S.D.N.Y. 2007).
The court awarded Marden’s counsel, Howard Olinsky, $8,472 under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b). The award is to be paid from the claimant’s past-due benefits. The court also directed counsel to reimburse Marden for fees previously received under the Equal Access to Justice Act.
Disposition
The attorney-fee application was granted. The opinion does not describe the underlying Social Security merits ruling or explain the amount of any earlier Equal Access to Justice Act fee.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.