Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 10, 2020

Svechin v. Commissioner of Social Security

Judge
Gabriel Gorenstein
Docket
1:18-cv-06717
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Fee PetitionSocial Security
In one sentence

In Svechin v. Commissioner, Judge Gorenstein granted counsel’s fee motion, awarding $27,678.90 and requiring a $7,000 refund.

Who this affects

Plaintiff’s counsel Eddy Pierre Pierre received a $27,678.90 fee award, paid from plaintiff’s withheld past-due benefits, and was required to refund plaintiff $7,000 in previously received fees.

What happened

In Svechin v. Commissioner of Social Security, the court considered plaintiff’s counsel’s request for attorney’s fees. The request was filed later than the usual 14-day deadline.

The court extended the deadline because the filing was only weeks late and counsel was justifiably unaware of a decision called Sinkler. It also found the requested fee reasonable because the case was not certain to succeed and contingency-fee representation in Social Security cases should be encouraged.

Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein granted the motion. He awarded attorney Eddy Pierre Pierre $27,678.90 under federal law, to be paid from past-due benefits withheld by the Commissioner, and ordered counsel to refund plaintiff $7,000 within seven days after receiving the award.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Svechin v. Commissioner of Social Security · No. 1:18-cv-06717
Judge
Gabriel Gorenstein
Date
Feb. 10, 2020

Background

Plaintiff’s counsel applied for attorney’s fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b), a federal law governing fees for representation in Social Security cases. The application was filed after the 14-day deadline in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d)(2)(B).

Deadline

The court extended the deadline based on unusual circumstances. It noted that the filing was late by only several weeks and accepted that counsel was justifiably unaware of the Sinkler decision.

Reasonableness of the Fee

The court found that the factors used to evaluate the reasonableness of attorney’s fees had been satisfied. Relying on the reasons discussed in Blizzard v. Astrue, the court concluded that the requested award was not excessive in relation to the hours counsel worked. The court also considered that Svechin’s case was not certain to succeed and that fee awards can encourage attorneys to accept Social Security cases on a contingency-fee basis.

Order

The court ordered three things: (1) it granted plaintiff’s counsel’s motion for attorney’s fees, identified as Docket No. 21; (2) it awarded attorney Eddy Pierre Pierre $27,678.90 in fees under Section 406(b), payable from the past-due benefits the Commissioner withheld for plaintiff; and (3) it required Eddy Pierre Pierre to refund plaintiff $7,000 within seven days after receiving the award. The $7,000 represented fees previously awarded and received under the Equal Access to Justice Act.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.