Keys v. Kijakazi
- William Alsup
- 3:21-cv-00145
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 3
In Keys v. Kijakazi, Judge Alsup granted the fee motion to the extent stated, authorizing $37,841.25 from past-due Social Security benefits.
Ronald Keys and his two auxiliary beneficiaries, whose past-due Social Security benefits will fund the $37,841.25 attorney-fee award; Keys will receive a $7,800 refund from counsel.
What happened
In Keys v. Kijakazi, Ronald Keys challenged the Social Security Administration’s decision after an administrative law judge found him disabled only for part of the claimed period. The case was sent back for further proceedings, and the remand led to a full award of benefits.
Keys’s counsel asked for $37,842.25 in fees under a law governing attorney fees for successful Social Security appeals. Judge Alsup found the correct amount was $37,841.25, based on the agency’s notices of award, and found that amount reasonable.
Judge Alsup granted the motion to the extent stated and authorized $37,841.25 to be paid from past-due benefits. Counsel must refund Keys the $7,800 previously received under the Equal Access to Justice Act.
The detailed version
- Keys v. Kijakazi · No. 3:21-cv-00145
- William Alsup
- Nov. 27, 2023
Background
Ronald Keys applied for Social Security disability insurance benefits in September 2018. His application was denied at the initial and reconsideration stages. After testimony from Keys and a vocational expert, an administrative law judge issued a partially favorable decision finding that Keys was disabled from March 26, 2017, through May 31, 2019. The Appeals Council declined review.
Keys then brought this federal-court appeal and moved for summary judgment. The parties stipulated to sending the case back to the agency for further proceedings, and judgment was entered in Keys’s favor. The remand ultimately resulted in an outright award of benefits.
Attorney-fee request
Keys’s counsel sought $37,842.25 under Section 406(b), a federal law governing attorney fees for successful representation of Social Security claimants in court. The request was based on a fee agreement and was described as 25 percent of the past-due benefits owed to Keys and his two auxiliary beneficiaries.
The notices of award showed that 25 percent of the relevant benefits was actually $37,841.25: $25,220.75 withheld for Keys and $6,310.25 withheld for each of the two auxiliary beneficiaries. The notices also showed total past-due benefits of $151,365, rather than the $151,369 stated by counsel.
Court’s analysis and ruling
The court explained that Section 406(b) requires judicial review of contingent-fee arrangements to ensure that they produce reasonable results. It also noted that counsel may seek fees for substantial work in federal court that results in a remand, so long as the claimant later receives past-due benefits. Because Keys’s counsel pursued the appeal, obtained the remand, and Keys was later awarded past-due benefits, the court concluded that counsel could seek fees under Section 406(b).
The court found the adjusted fee request reasonable and consistent with the statute and the fee agreement. In reaching that conclusion, it considered the benefits secured by the remand, the contingency risk, Attorney David Chermol’s experience, and the hours reasonably spent.
The court granted the motion to the extent stated and authorized a Section 406(b) fee award of $37,841.25, to be paid from Keys’s past-due benefits in accordance with agency policy. Counsel must refund Keys the $7,800 previously received under the Equal Access to Justice Act.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.