Youness v. Berryhill
- David Doty
- 0:17-cv-04108
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 6
In Youness v. Berryhill, Judge Thorson granted in part and denied in part a fee motion, awarding $8,452.41 after a Social Security remand.
Tanya Renea Youness and her attorneys received an award of $8,452.41; the government’s objections reduced the requested amount by $230.34.
What happened
In Youness v. Berryhill, Tanya Renea Youness challenged the denial of her application for Social Security disability benefits. The court had previously granted part of her summary-judgment motion, denied the government’s motion, and sent the case back for further proceedings.
Youness then requested $8,682.75 in attorney fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act. The government did not object to awarding fees but argued that one attorney’s hourly rate should be lower and that some of the billed time was unnecessary or excessive.
Becky R. Thorson granted in part and denied in part the fee motion. The court awarded $8,452.41, using a lower hourly rate for James H. Greeman but allowing the requested hours for both attorneys.
The detailed version
- Youness v. Berryhill · No. 0:17-cv-04108
- David Doty
- Sept. 5, 2018
Background
Tanya Renea Youness sought judicial review of the denial of her application for Social Security disability benefits. In an earlier order, the court granted in part Youness’s motion for summary judgment, denied the Commissioner’s motion for summary judgment, and remanded the case under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), sentence four, for further proceedings.
Youness then moved for attorney fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA). The EAJA generally allows a prevailing party in a case reviewing government agency action to recover reasonable fees unless the government’s position was substantially justified. The court determined that a sentence-four remand made Youness a prevailing party. The government did not dispute that fees should be awarded and therefore conceded that its position was not substantially justified. Its objections concerned only the amount.
Fee Request and Objections
Youness requested compensation for 2.75 hours of James H. Greeman’s work at $275 per hour and 41.5 hours of Dori H. Leland’s work at $191 per hour. The government argued that Greeman’s rate should be limited to the standard adjusted rate of $191.24 per hour. It also argued that time spent by both attorneys reviewing and revising the brief was duplicative and that Leland’s total hours should be reduced to no more than 25 hours.
Court’s Analysis
The court accepted $191.24 per hour as the standard adjusted rate, based on the increase in the cost of living. It found that Greeman had not provided sufficient evidence of special factors supporting a higher rate based on his experience. Leland’s rate remained $191 per hour because Youness had agreed to that rate.
The court rejected the government’s argument that the attorneys’ review and revision time was unnecessary or duplicative. It found that having a more senior attorney review and revise a brief prepared by a more junior attorney was commonplace and expected. The court also found that Leland’s 41.5 hours were not excessive or unreasonable after reviewing the itemized time records and the work performed.
Disposition
The court granted in part and denied in part Youness’s motion for attorney fees under the EAJA. It awarded a total of $8,452.41: $525.91 for Greeman’s 2.75 hours at $191.24 per hour and $7,926.50 for Leland’s 41.5 hours at $191 per hour. This reduced the requested award by $230.34.
The order was signed by Becky R. Thorson, United States Magistrate Judge.
Read the full 6-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.