Fields v. Berryhill

Background

Jim R. Fields pursued Social Security disability benefits based on an alleged disability beginning February 12, 2009. An administrative law judge twice found him not disabled. Fields appealed to the United States District Court, and the case was remanded twice for further proceedings under agreements between the parties.

After the second remand, an administrative law judge found Fields disabled as of his alleged onset date. The Social Security Administration issued a notice stating that $40,170 had been withheld from Fields’s past-due benefits for legal fees. Binder & Binder moved under Section 206(b)(1)(A) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 406(b)(1)(A), for approval of $40,170, the amount specified by the retainer agreement as 25% of past-due benefits. Binder & Binder had previously received $5,100 in fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act and agreed to refund that amount to Fields if the Section 406(b) award was paid.

Legal standard

Section 406(b) permits a court, after a favorable judgment for a claimant represented by an attorney, to approve a reasonable attorney fee of up to 25% of the claimant’s past-due benefits. The court began with the contingency-fee agreement but independently reviewed whether the requested amount was reasonable. Relevant considerations included whether the fee was within the 25% limit, whether the agreement resulted from fraud or overreaching, whether counsel delayed the proceedings, whether the fee was out of line with the representation and result, and whether the fee would be an improper windfall.

Fees may be awarded under both Section 406(b) and the Equal Access to Justice Act, but counsel must refund the smaller fee to the claimant.

Court’s analysis

The court found that the requested fee was within the statutory 25% limit and that there was no evidence of fraud or overreaching. It also found that Binder & Binder did not unreasonably delay the proceedings, was experienced in Social Security cases, and submitted specific, well-supported written work.

Binder & Binder reported 25.8 hours of work before the court: 22.7 hours by Daniel S. Jones and 3.1 hours by Charles E. Binder. The court found the number of hours reasonable. However, the requested $40,170 would result in an effective hourly rate of $1,556.98, which the court found required further examination and ultimately considered unreasonable. The court also considered the firm’s representation of Fields during multiple administrative hearings and appeals dating back to 2014, including work at the agency level that helped show the case’s complexity, risks, and significance.

Disposition

The court granted in part and denied in part Binder & Binder’s motion for attorney fees. It awarded the firm $19,350, an effective hourly rate of $750, and ordered the firm, upon receiving that amount, to refund the previously awarded $5,100 in Equal Access to Justice Act fees directly to Fields.