Mirto v. Kijakazi

Background

Joseph Mirto applied for disability benefits, but his application was denied at the initial stage, on reconsideration, after an administrative hearing, and by the Appeals Council. He then sought judicial review under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). The court found in his favor and remanded the case for further proceedings.

After the remand, the Commissioner approved Mirto’s application and awarded Supplemental Security Income payments, including $38,485.69 in past-due benefits. Mirto had entered into a contingency-fee agreement allowing his attorney, Katherine Siegfried, to receive 25% of past-due benefits. The Commissioner’s notice stated that 25% was $9,621.42 and that amount was set aside for attorney fees.

The court had previously approved $8,500 in fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act, a law that allows certain attorney-fee awards to be paid by the government. Siegfried then sought $9,621.42 under section 206(b) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 406(b), as applied to the Supplemental Security Income program.

Legal standard

Section 406(b) allows a federal court to approve a reasonable fee for an attorney who represented a claimant in court, up to 25% of the claimant’s past-due benefits resulting from the favorable judgment. The court must independently review the requested fee for reasonableness, beginning with the contingency-fee agreement and considering factors such as the quality of the representation, delay, and whether the fee is out of proportion to the time spent.

When fees are awarded under both section 406(b) and the Equal Access to Justice Act, the attorney must refund the smaller award to the claimant, up to the point that the claimant receives all of the past-due benefits.

Court’s analysis

The court found that Siegfried met her burden to show that the requested fee was reasonable. The 25% fee matched the agreement and did not exceed the statutory cap. The court found no evidence of substandard performance and noted that counsel’s representation resulted in Mirto receiving past-due benefits.

Siegfried reported spending 36.3 hours on the case, producing an effective hourly rate of $265 for the requested fee. The court stated that the contingency arrangement involved a substantial risk of loss and that the request was reasonable in light of that risk.

Because the court found the section 406(b) request reasonable, it required Siegfried to refund the previously awarded $8,500 in Equal Access to Justice Act fees to Mirto.

Disposition

The court GRANTS counsel’s motion for attorney fees. It directs the Commissioner to certify $9,621.42 in section 406(b) fees, payable to Katherine Siegfried. The award is to be paid from Mirto’s past-due benefits in accordance with agency policy, to the extent those benefits are available and were not used to pay an attorney fee under section 406(a). Siegfried is ORDERED to reimburse Mirto $8,500 in Equal Access to Justice Act fees.