Gokey v. Berryhill

Background

Robert Gokey retained attorney Christopher Bowes to challenge an administrative law judge’s denial of his application for disability benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act. Bowes filed the federal case and moved for judgment on the pleadings, meaning he asked the court to decide the case based on the existing administrative record. The Commissioner filed a cross-motion. The court granted Gokey’s motion and denied the Commissioner’s motion, then sent the matter back for further proceedings.

On remand, Gokey—represented by different counsel—received a favorable decision finding him disabled as of March 12, 2015. The Social Security Administration awarded Gokey $63,491 in past-due benefits and also awarded past-due benefits to three of his children. The agency withheld $22,271.75, representing 25% of the combined past-due benefits, for possible attorney fees.

The parties had previously stipulated to $7,000 in attorney fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act. Bowes then moved for $22,271.75 under Section 406(b)(1)(A) of the Social Security Act. The Commissioner did not object to the requested amount on the condition that Bowes refund the $7,000 Equal Access to Justice Act award to Gokey.

Legal standard

Section 406(b) allows a court to award a successful Social Security claimant’s attorney a reasonable fee, up to 25% of the past-due benefits resulting from the favorable judgment. The court must independently review a contingency-fee agreement rather than automatically approve it. Relevant considerations include whether the fee is within the 25% limit, whether fraud or overreaching occurred, whether the fee would be an improper windfall, whether it matches the quality and results of the representation, and whether the attorney unreasonably delayed the case.

An attorney who receives fees under both Section 406(b) and the Equal Access to Justice Act must refund the smaller award to the client.

Court’s analysis

The court found that the requested $22,271.75 did not exceed the statutory 25% limit and found no evidence of fraud or overreaching. Although Bowes missed a filing deadline by nearly two months, the court found that the delay appeared to be an oversight rather than an effort to increase the past-due benefits or his fee.

The court also found that the fee was consistent with the representation and the results achieved. Bowes had prevailed on the motion for judgment on the pleadings and obtained a remand that ultimately led to a favorable disability determination. He spent 34.9 hours on the federal case, primarily reviewing the administrative record and preparing pleadings. The court found the time entries reasonable and not duplicative or questionable.

The requested fee produced an effective hourly rate of $638.16. Although that rate was considerably higher than Bowes’s rate in non-contingency cases, the court focused primarily on whether the award would be a windfall rather than applying a fixed hourly-rate method. The court noted that Bowes’s 25-page brief addressed Gokey’s medical history, cited the 418-page administrative record, and presented specific arguments supported by legal authority. It also considered Bowes’s experience, the efficiency of his work, the successful result, and the risk involved in accepting the case on a contingency basis. The court concluded that the requested fee was not a windfall.

Disposition

The court granted attorney fees in the amount of $22,271.75. Upon receiving that amount, Bowes must refund the previously awarded $7,000 Equal Access to Justice Act fees directly to Gokey. The court directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the fee motion.