Brenn v. O'Malley

Background

Lloyd Brenn challenged an administrative decision denying his application for Social Security Act benefits. The court previously granted Brenn’s motion for summary judgment and remanded the matter for an award of benefits rather than further administrative proceedings. The opinion states that the resulting award of past-due benefits was $174,914.

Brenn’s attorney, Katherine R. Siegfried, moved for attorney’s fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b). The fee agreement provided that fees would be the lesser of 25% of any past-due benefits or the amount permitted under 42 U.S.C. § 406(a)(2)(A). Siegfried requested $43,728.50, equal to 25% of the past-due benefits award.

Legal standard

Section 406(b) permits a court to award a successful Social Security claimant’s attorney fees of up to 25% of past-due benefits. The court must independently review the fee arrangement to determine whether it produces a reasonable result. Relevant considerations include the quality of the representation, the result achieved, whether counsel delayed the case, and whether the fee would be an improper windfall. A court may consider an hourly-rate calculation as an aid, but that calculation is not the required starting point for evaluating a contingency-fee agreement.

Any fee awarded under § 406(b) must be offset by an award under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA). Here, Siegfried agreed to refund Brenn the $21,750 EAJA fee previously awarded.

Court’s analysis

Siegfried reported spending 104.6 hours litigating the current action and the earlier round of this case: 49.6 hours on the current action and 55 hours on the earlier round. The requested fee produced an effective hourly rate of $418.05.

The court found the request reasonable because it did not exceed the 25% statutory maximum, and the hours spent appeared reasonable. The court also explained that the lodestar method—which generally multiplies reasonable hours by a reasonable hourly rate—should not control § 406(b) awards because it can undercompensate attorneys who accept the risk of contingency-fee representation. The $418.05 effective hourly rate was also equal to or lower than rates other courts had approved in similar § 406(b) matters.

The record did not suggest that Siegfried provided substandard representation. The court noted that she obtained a substantial past-due-benefits award and that no party objected to the fee request. The court therefore concluded that the fee was not excessively large in relation to the benefits achieved.

Disposition

The court granted the motion for attorney’s fees. It awarded Siegfried $43,728.50 and ordered her to refund Brenn the $21,750 previously awarded under the EAJA.