David G. v. Saul

Background

David G. applied for Social Security Disability Insurance and Supplemental Security Income benefits. An administrative law judge initially found him not disabled, and the Social Security Administration’s Appeals Council declined review. David G. then sought judicial review.

The court previously granted David G.’s motion for summary judgment and remanded the case for further administrative proceedings. On remand, an administrative law judge found that David G. was disabled and entitled to past-due disability benefits.

Fee Request

David G.’s lawyer, Katherine Siegfried, moved for attorney fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b). The retainer agreement allowed her to seek up to 25% of any past-due benefits. She requested $49,213.50, which represented 25% of David G.’s total benefits award. She reported spending 65.2 hours litigating the case in federal court. The requested amount produced an effective hourly rate of $754.80.

The court had previously approved $8,000 in fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act. The court stated that Siegfried must refund that amount to David G. from the § 406(b) award. No party objected to the fee request, and David G. declared that he agreed she should receive the full 25% fee.

Court’s Analysis

Section 406(b) permits a lawyer who successfully represents a Social Security claimant in federal court to receive up to 25% of the claimant’s past-due benefits. The court must independently review a contingency-fee agreement to determine whether it produces a reasonable result. Relevant considerations include the quality of the representation and the result achieved. Courts may reduce a requested fee if the representation was inadequate, the lawyer caused delay, or the fee would be an excessive windfall.

The court found the requested fee reasonable. It did not exceed the statutory 25% maximum, and the hours Siegfried reported were reasonable. The court explained that a lodestar calculation—a fee estimate based primarily on hours worked multiplied by an hourly rate—should assist but should not control the review of a § 406(b) fee. The court also noted that comparable or larger effective hourly rates had been approved in other California Social Security cases.

Nothing in the record indicated that Siegfried provided inadequate representation. She obtained a substantial past-due benefits award, and David G. supported the motion. The court concluded that the fee was not excessively large compared with the benefits achieved.

Disposition

The court granted the motion for attorney fees and awarded Siegfried $49,213.50. Siegfried must refund David G. the $8,000 previously awarded under the Equal Access to Justice Act.