Linda R. v. O'Malley
- Sarah Cave
- 1:24-cv-06514
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 11
In Linda R. v. O’Malley, Judge Cave granted in part and denied in part EAJA fees, awarding counsel $9,982.78.
Linda R., her counsel at the Law Office of Charles E. Binder and Harry J. Binder, LLC, and the Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration were affected. The firm received the $9,982.78 fee award; the Commissioner’s requested eight-hour reduction was rejected, but the firm did not receive compensation for the additional 2.8 hours.
What happened
In Linda R. v. O’Malley, Linda R. challenged the denial of Child Disability Benefits sought for D. J. R. IV. The parties agreed to reverse and send the decision back to the Social Security Administration for further proceedings, making Linda R. a prevailing party for fee purposes.
Linda R. requested attorneys’ fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act. The Commissioner objected to eight hours of the lawyers’ work, while the law firm requested additional fees for preparing the fee motion. The court found the original 39.40 hours and the requested hourly rate reasonable, but rejected the additional 2.8 hours because they did not meaningfully assist the court.
Judge Cave granted in part and denied in part the fee motion and awarded the law firm $9,982.78 under the Equal Access to Justice Act.
The detailed version
- Linda R. v. O'Malley · No. 1:24-cv-06514
- Sarah Cave
- Apr. 17, 2025
Background
Linda R. applied for Child Disability Benefits on behalf of her son, D. J. R. IV. The Social Security Administration denied the application, and an Administrative Law Judge later found that D. J. R. IV was not entitled to the benefits. After Linda R. challenged that decision in federal court, the parties stipulated to reversing and remanding the decision to the Commissioner for further administrative proceedings under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). The court entered judgment on February 14, 2025.
The opinion notes that Leland Dudek became Acting Commissioner on February 16, 2025, and directs the Clerk to substitute him for Martin O'Malley as the defendant under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(d).
Fee Motion
Linda R. moved for attorneys’ fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act, a federal law that can require the government to pay reasonable legal fees to a prevailing party unless the government’s position was substantially justified or special circumstances would make an award unfair. Linda R. assigned her rights to the fees to the Law Office of Charles E. Binder and Harry J. Binder, LLC, and the court honored that assignment because nothing in the record suggested that she had outstanding federal debts.
Two attorneys initially reported 39.40 hours of work: Daniel S. Jones worked 33.60 hours, and Charles E. Binder worked 5.80 hours. Linda R. requested compensation at $253.37 per hour, for a total of $9,982.78. The Commissioner did not challenge the hourly rate or Linda R.’s status as a prevailing party, but argued that eight hours spent preparing the statement of facts should be removed because much of the record was outside the relevant period. The law firm opposed that reduction and later sought compensation for an additional 2.8 hours spent preparing the fee motion and responding to the opposition, increasing the request to $10,692.21.
Court’s Analysis
The court concluded that Linda R. was a prevailing party because the stipulated remand materially changed the legal relationship between the parties in her favor. The court also found that the requested hourly rate was reasonable. It calculated that the applicable cost-of-living-adjusted rate was $254.92 per hour, making the requested $253.37 rate permissible.
The court found sufficient justification for the original 39.40 hours. Although the Commissioner argued that only 31.40 hours were reasonable, the court considered the size of the 1,423-page administrative record and decisions allowing more hours in other Social Security cases. The court therefore rejected the requested eight-hour reduction. However, it found that the additional 2.8 hours for preparing the fee motion and reviewing and filing a reply did not meaningfully assist the court and were not justified.
Disposition
Judge Sarah L. Cave granted in part and denied in part the fee motion. The court awarded the firm $9,982.78 under the Equal Access to Justice Act and directed the Clerk of Court to close the fee-motion docket entry.
Read the full 11-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.