Flanders v. Commissioner of Social Security

Background

Melanie Flanders applied for disability benefits beginning June 30, 2017. The Social Security Administration denied her application, and an administrative law judge later denied it after a hearing. The Appeals Council denied review, making the administrative law judge’s decision final. Flanders then filed this action.

After Flanders moved for judgment on the pleadings, the parties stipulated to a remand for further administrative proceedings on April 13, 2022. The court later awarded Flanders’s attorneys $7,075 in fees and $17.58 in expenses under the Equal Access to Justice Act. On remand, the Social Security Administration found Flanders disabled as of December 2017.

The agency initially issued a May 20, 2024 notice stating that Flanders was entitled to $25,258 in past-due benefits. Her attorneys disputed that amount and obtained oral confirmation that their calculation of $65,069 was correct. They then filed this fee motion. On August 28, 2024, the agency issued an amended notice stating that Flanders was entitled to $72,615.20 in past-due benefits and withholding $18,153.80, or 25 percent, for possible attorney fees.

Fee Request and Timeliness

Flanders’s retainer agreement provided that her attorneys could receive up to 25 percent of her past-due benefits for work performed before the court if the case was remanded and she received benefits after further proceedings. Her attorneys requested $16,267.25 under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b).

A fee motion under that statute generally must be filed within 14 days after receipt of the benefits notice. Magistrate Judge Barbara Moses concluded that the deadline should be extended here because the original notice contained an incorrect benefits amount. She treated the filing period as beginning with the amended notice, making the motion timely under the circumstances.

Reasonableness of the Fee

The court evaluated whether the requested fee was reasonable. The fee was below 25 percent of Flanders’s past-due benefits. The record contained no evidence that the retainer agreement resulted from fraud or improper pressure. The attorneys and other timekeepers spent 38.1 hours on the action, including reviewing a 1,045-page administrative record and preparing a 23-page memorandum supporting Flanders’s motion.

The court also considered whether the fee would be an improper windfall. Although the requested amount represented an effective hourly rate of approximately $427, the court explained that a simple hourly-rate calculation does not control fee requests under § 406(b). It found that the attorneys obtained a remand, continued representing Flanders, and ultimately secured a disability finding and substantial past-due benefits. The court therefore concluded that the requested fee was not a windfall.

Recommendation

Magistrate Judge Moses recommended that Flanders’s motion be granted. She recommended directing the Social Security Administration to approve payment of $16,267.25 to Flanders’s attorneys from her past-due benefits. She also recommended directing the attorneys, after receiving the § 406(b) fee, to refund $7,075 to Flanders because that amount had previously been awarded under the Equal Access to Justice Act.

The document is a report and recommendation addressed to Judge Analisa Torres, not a statement that Judge Torres had already entered the recommended order. The parties had 14 days from November 21, 2024, to file written objections. The opinion states that failing to object timely would waive objections and preclude appellate review.