James P. v. Saul
- Jacquelyn Corley
- 3:19-cv-01354-JSC
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 4
In James P. v. Kijakazi, Judge Corley granted counsel’s fee motion, approving $31,000 under Social Security law and requiring a $4,000 refund.
James P. and his counsel, Harvey Sackett and Sackett and Associates, are affected. The Commissioner must certify the $31,000 fee, and counsel must refund $4,000 to James P.
What happened
In James P. v. Kijakazi, James P.’s lawyer requested payment for representing him in his successful challenge to the denial of Social Security disability benefits. The court had previously sent the case back for further proceedings after granting James P.’s request for judgment and denying the Commissioner’s request.
The lawyer requested $31,000 from James P.’s past-due benefits under a fee agreement allowing up to 25 percent. The court found the amount reasonable because it was less than 20 percent of the past-due benefits, the lawyer had not performed inadequately or delayed the case, and the case involved a risk that the lawyer might not be paid. The lawyer also agreed to return $4,000 previously awarded under the Equal Access to Justice Act.
Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley granted the amended fee motion. She directed the Commissioner to certify $31,000 payable to Sackett and Associates and ordered counsel to refund the $4,000 Equal Access to Justice Act payment to James P.
The detailed version
- James P. v. Saul · No. 3:19-cv-01354-JSC
- Jacquelyn Corley
- Dec. 19, 2022
Background
James P. challenged the Social Security Administration’s denial of disability benefits based on physical and mental impairments. On August 4, 2022, the court granted James P.’s motion for summary judgment, denied the Commissioner’s motion, and remanded the case for further proceedings. The opinion states that James P. later received $164,795.10 in past-due benefits, from which the agency withheld $41,198.78 in case representative fees were owed.
James P.’s counsel, Harvey Sackett, filed an amended motion under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b) seeking $31,000 for work performed in federal court. The contingency-fee agreement allowed counsel to seek up to 25 percent of past-due benefits. The requested $31,000 was approximately 19 percent of the benefits. The Commissioner took no position on the motion.
Legal standard
Section 406(b) permits a court to award a reasonable fee to a lawyer who represented a Social Security claimant in court, subject to a limit of 25 percent of the claimant’s past-due benefits. The court must independently review the fee request to ensure that the contingency-fee agreement produces a reasonable result. The court may consider whether the lawyer provided inadequate representation, delayed the case to increase fees, requested an excessive amount compared with the benefits obtained, or accepted substantial risk by taking the case.
Fees awarded under Section 406(b) must be reduced by any fees previously awarded under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA).
Analysis
The court found the requested $31,000 reasonable. The fee agreement was within the 25-percent statutory limit. The court found no indication of inadequate representation or intentional delay. It also found that the amount was not excessive because it was less than 20 percent of James P.’s past-due benefits. Finally, the court found that counsel had assumed substantial risk of not recovering fees when the representation began.
Disposition
The court GRANTS Plaintiff’s counsel’s amended motion for fees. It directed the Commissioner to certify $31,000 under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b), payable to Sackett and Associates. Counsel must refund the previously awarded $4,000 in EAJA fees to James P. The order disposes of Docket No. 36.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.