Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Sept. 30, 2021

De Los Santos v. Berryhill

Judge
Nelson Roman
Docket
7:18-cv-02113-NSR-LMS
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
6
Social SecurityFee PetitionCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In De Los Santos v. Berryhill, Judge Roman granted counsel $14,909 in Social Security fees after extending the filing deadline.

Who this affects

Mayelin De Los Santos and her counsel, Pierre Pierre Law, P.C.; the Commissioner of Social Security was the opposing party.

What happened

De Los Santos v. Berryhill concerned Mayelin De Los Santos’s request for attorney’s fees after the court sent her Social Security benefits case back for further proceedings and she later received benefits. Her lawyer sought 25% of her past-due benefits.

The court found the fee motion timely even though it was filed about 11 days late, citing disruptions caused by the coronavirus pandemic and extending the deadline. It also found the requested fee reasonable under the Social Security Act.

Judge Roman adopted Magistrate Judge Lisa M. Smith’s recommendation and granted the motion for $14,909 in attorney’s fees. The law firm was ordered to refund $8,031.20 previously awarded to De Los Santos, and the court terminated the motions and the action.

The detailed version

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

Case
De Los Santos v. Berryhill · No. 7:18-cv-02113-NSR-LMS
Judge
Nelson Roman
Date
Sept. 30, 2021

Background

Mayelin De Los Santos challenged the Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of her applications for disability benefits and Supplemental Security Income. The parties agreed to send the case back to the Social Security Administration for further proceedings. On remand, De Los Santos was awarded disability benefits. The Social Security Administration’s notice stated that it was withholding $14,909 from her past-due benefits for attorney’s fees.

De Los Santos’s counsel had previously received $8,031.20 under a party stipulation. Counsel then filed an amended motion under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b)(1), seeking 25% of De Los Santos’s past-due benefits, or $14,909. The motion was referred to Magistrate Judge Lisa M. Smith, who recommended granting it. Neither party filed objections.

Timeliness

The court explained that attorney-fee motions generally must be filed within 14 days after the claimant receives notice of the benefits calculation, but the deadline may be extended when circumstances warrant. The motion was filed about 11 days after the 14-day period ended. The court extended the deadline because the coronavirus pandemic caused significant disruptions in New York and restricted counsel from working outside his home. The court therefore treated the motion as timely.

Reasonableness of the Fee

Under § 406(b), attorney’s fees for work performed in federal court may not exceed 25% of a claimant’s past-due benefits. Courts first examine the fee agreement and then determine whether the requested amount is reasonable. The court adopted Magistrate Judge Smith’s consideration of whether the agreement was capped at 25%, whether there was fraud or overreaching, and whether the requested fee would be an improper windfall. The defendant did not object to the reasonableness of the requested fee.

Ruling

Judge Nelson S. Roman adopted the report and recommendation in its entirety and granted De Los Santos’s motion for attorney’s fees. The court awarded $14,909, payable to Pierre Pierre Law, P.C., and directed counsel to refund the previously awarded $8,031.20 to De Los Santos. The Clerk was directed to terminate the motions at ECF Nos. 22 and 31 and terminate the action.

The authoritative version

Read the full 6-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.