Conforti v. Berryhill
- John Koeltl
- 1:19-cv-02958
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 9
In Conforti v. Berryhill, Judge Koeltl granted the fee motion in part, awarding $6,034.51 to the plaintiff.
Francesca Conforti receives $6,034.51 in attorney fees, and the Commissioner must pay the award to Conforti rather than directly to her attorney.
What happened
In Conforti v. Berryhill, Francesca Conforti sought attorney fees after the court remanded her Social Security disability-benefits case for further proceedings. She requested $7,543.14 under the Equal Access to Justice Act.
The Commissioner did not dispute that Conforti qualified for fees or that the government’s position was not substantially justified. But the Commissioner argued that the requested hours should be reduced and that any award should be paid to Conforti rather than her attorney.
Judge John G. Koeltl granted the motion in part and awarded $6,034.51. He reduced the billed hours because some entries involved clerical work, were too vague, or were inconsistent, and ordered that the award be paid to Conforti.
The detailed version
- Conforti v. Berryhill · No. 1:19-cv-02958
- John Koeltl
- Mar. 2, 2021
Background
Francesca Conforti applied for Social Security disability insurance benefits. The Commissioner denied the application, and an Administrative Law Judge later denied her claim. The Appeals Council declined further review. Conforti then sought judicial review in the district court.
On January 6, 2020, based on the parties’ stipulation, the court remanded the case to the Commissioner for further administrative proceedings under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). Conforti then moved for attorney fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act, requesting $7,543.14. She also asked that the award be made payable to her attorney under an assignment in her retainer agreement.
Fee calculation
The Equal Access to Justice Act generally requires an award of reasonable attorney fees to a prevailing party in a civil action against the United States when the government’s position was not substantially justified. The court found that Conforti met the statutory requirements. The Commissioner did not dispute that she was a prevailing party or that the government’s position was not substantially justified.
The parties did not dispute the requested hourly rate of $207.80. The court accepted that rate because Conforti had shown that an increase in the cost of living justified a rate above the statute’s ordinary $125-per-hour limit.
The court found deficiencies in the attorney’s time records. Some entries included clerical tasks, such as filing, that were not reimbursable. Other entries were too vague because they merely described activities as case review and research, beginning a motion draft, or drafting, editing, completing, and filing a motion. The court also found an inconsistency between two entries concerning preparation of the fee motion.
Because the records did not adequately allow the court to review the claimed work, the court reduced the reimbursed hours by 20 percent. The reduction left 29.04 reimbursable hours and produced a total award of $6,034.51.
Payment of the award
The court also rejected the request to make the award payable directly to Conforti’s attorney. The Supreme Court has held that an Equal Access to Justice Act fee award is payable to the litigant, although contractual assignment rights may sometimes allow payment to the attorney.
The court held that the Anti-Assignment Act applied because the Commissioner opposed the assignment. Conforti’s assignment was made before the claim was allowed and its amount was decided, and it did not satisfy the statute’s additional requirements. The court therefore found the assignment invalid under that Act.
Disposition
The motion for attorney fees was granted in part, for an award of $6,034.51 payable to Conforti. The Clerk was directed to close docket number 17.
Read the full 9-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.